


Wfltiffl 
ffiffil 

Hill 



HRii 



nffli 



: ■'■'■■■ B ' : 



SHhBH 







5S 




Glass BS 2SQ.f 

Book •§% 

l%9l 




e 




. C . *OCUa<o 



% 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



THE APOSTLE PAUL: 

§1 SSRetcJ) of tbe pebelopnmtf of Ins glotirwe. 



^€^ 



A. SABATIER, 

Professor in the Faculty of Protestant Theology in Paris. 



TRANSLATED FROM THE FRENXH. 



EDITED, WITH AX ADDITIONAL ESSAY ON THE PASTORAL EPISTLES, BY 

GEORGE G. vN FINDLAY, B.A., 

Author of " Galatians" in " The Expositors Bible.' 



#efo gork: 

JAMES POTT & CO., 

14 & 16, ASTOR PLACE. 

1891. 






8y Transfer 

D. C. Pubfic Library 

DEC 28 1938 



WITHDRAW^ 

568815* 




AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE 
ENGLISH EDITION. 

/ nr % RANSLATION into another tongue is for any 
^- book an honourable and a perilous experience. 
The author of Lapotre Paul is fully conscious both 
of the honour and the peril. The success of a work . 

(q a 

which is in any degree original depends not only 
upon its intrinsic merit, but also, to a great extent, 
upon a certain instinctive harmony already established 
between the mind of the author and the requirements 
of the public to which he addresses himself. No 
plant is rooted in its native soil by finer and more 
numerous fibres than is a literary work in the 
country and society in which it was produced. It 
is with some anxiety that I inquire whether Uapotre 
Paul, under the new circumstances in which it is 
about to appear, will again meet with the inner cor- 
respondence and the moral and spiritual sympathy 
necessary to make it intelligible and to justify its 
publication. 

There are two things, however, which re-assure 
me. The first is the distinguished patronage under 
which my work is presented to English readers, the 

b 



PREFACE. 



care, learning and judgment of those who are re- 
sponsible for the translation of my work. My 
further ground of confidence is derived from the 
hero of the book himself and the universal interest 
which he inspires. Where should he be studied, loved 
and venerated, if not in England ? Are not English 
Christians, in a very special sense, his spiritual chil- 
dren ? Do they not owe to him the character of their 
religion, the form of their doctrine, even their principles 
of religious liberty and civil right ? Is not Anglo- 
Saxon society his work ? Does not his spirit pervade 
the thousand ramifications of English civilization, 
extending from individual conduct to the highest 
scientific activity, from domestic life to the political 
debates of Parliament ? Who is there, we may ask, 
not among theologians only, but amongst all earnest 
and cultured men, who is not interested in every 
attempt made to understand the apostle better, and 
to explore the inner workings of his mind ? 

Paul as a missionary and shepherd of souls is great 
indeed. There is nothing in all antiquity to compare 
with the record of his travels and his triumphs. 
Feeble in body, living by his toil like a working- 
man, this weaver of Tarsus enters the vast world of 
Paganism, another Alexander, to conquer the faith 
and the reason of mankind. Merely to form such a 
resolution was heroic. Darkness covered the earth ; 
the peoples, to use the language of the prophet, were 
sitting in the valley of the shadow of death. Paul 
entered, alone at first, into these depths of darkness, 



PREFACE. 



with the Gospel torch in his hand ; and wherever he 
went he left in his track from Damascus to Rome a 
succession of young expanding Churches, the radiant 
centres of a new life, the fruitful germs of modern 
society forming already in the midst of the old world. 
In all this, I repeat, there is something truly heroic. 

There is something greater still in the mind that 
inspired this mighty work, and of which, in truth, the 
work itself is only the exhibition and luminous tran- 
scription in the visible order of things. Not only 
did Paul conquer the pagan world for Jesus Christ ; 
he accomplished a task no less necessary, and per- 
haps even more difficult, in emancipating at the 
same time infant Christianity from Judaism, under 
whose guardianship it was in danger of being stifled. 
Besides removing the centre of gravity of the new 
Church, by the advance of his mission, from Jerusalem 
to Antioch, from Antioch to Ephesus, and from 
Ephesus to Rome, he also succeeded in disengaging 
from the swaddling bands of Judaism the spiritual 
and moral principles which constitute Christianity a 
progressive and universal religion. 

Not that Paul can in any sense claim to be the 
founder of Christianity, or be compared to Jesus. 
The apostle gloried, and rightly, in being the servant, 
and not the master. It is as a servant that he is 
great. There was nothing creative in Paul's genius. 
The first impulse came from Jesus. Jesus it is who 
in our religious life has substituted filial relationship 
with the Father by means of the Holy Spirit for the 



viit PREFACE. 



legal relationship based upon the Mosaic law and 
tradition. Jesus established the new covenant ; and 
in doing this planted His cross, if we may so say, 
between ancient Judaism and the Gospel, in a way 
that rendered void all attempts at reconciliation. On 
the other hand, it is equally certain that His first 
disciples at Jerusalem endeavoured to repair this 
breach. They wished to keep the new wine in the old 
bottles. Next to Stephen, the first martyr, it was 
Paul who broke the Judaistic spell. To his think- 
ing, the Christian principle only took the place of the 
Jewish principle by destroying it. His conversion 
was, in effect, the negation of the power of the law 
as a means of salvation ; and his theology, centring 
entirely in the antithesis of faith and works, law 
and grace, the old things and the new, the time 
of bondage and the time of freedom, was but the 
expression in argument and theory of the moral and 
religious experiences which began in his conversion. 
Thus the external revolution had its spring in a 
psychological regeneration ; and it is important to 
grasp firmly this primary fact, if we would not mis- 
take the meaning of the whole drama. 

In reading the epistles of the great apostle, nothing 
strikes the attentive observer more than this psycho- 
logical connexion between his doctrinal creed and 
his inward life. The first is the beautiful fruitage of 
the second. Of no other doctrine can it be so truly 
said, that it was lived before it was taught. It may 
even be affirmed that oiu minds do not properly 



PREFACE. 



apprehend it, unless we have undergone for ourselves, 
in some measure, the inward experience it implies. 
An eminent professor of history of the Sorbonne at 
Paris related one day that he had remained for years 
without in the least understanding Paul's theology, 
and that its meaning was made clear to him by a 
Christian shoemaker at Lyons. The moral crisis of 
conversion is, indeed, the first and best initiation into 
the truths of Paulinism. 

But if the doctrine of the apostle Paul is always 
the outgrowth of his experience, it is easy to infer 
that it must have had a history, — that, in other words, 
it was developed in the order of these experiences. 
It is equally plain that from this historical standpoint 
alone shall we be able to understand it fully, and to 
account for the various forms it has assumed at dif- 
ferent times and under varying circumstances. To 
regard it in any other way would be inevitably to 
pervert its character, by making it a system of ab- 
stract philosophy, and by separating it from the parent 
stem whence it still derives its life and truth. This 
has been done, it seems to me, alike by the orthodoxy 
of the past and by the rationalistic criticism of the 
Tubingen School. They both deny the existence of 
progress and development in Paul's doctrine ; they 
sever the delicate nerves, of which we have spoken, 
that connected his spiritual thought and his spiri- 
tual life. 

The former theory assumes that he received his 
doctrinal system from heaven complete in its dialec- 



PREFACE. 



tical organization and its exegetical demonstrations 
— a thing absolutely inconceivable, since reasoning 
always implies effort on the part of the productive 
intelligence. The second school treats Paul as though, 
after his conversion, he had lived in solitude like a 
philosopher, creating by means of speculation and 
logic the entire doctrinal system that he was after- 
wards to preach, to expound, and defend before the 
world. In both instances there is the assumption 
that his mental and doctrinal development was com- 
plete from the outset, and was neither disturbed nor 
stimulated by new conflicts as they arose, — by the 
arguments of opponents, and by the experiences of 
his busy and exciting life. 

This is humanly impossible ; and it is historically 
untrue. It must be clearly understood that Paul was 
no philosopher of the schools. The purpose or wish 
to construct a system^ properly so called, was wholly 
foreign to his mind. He was a missionary, who 
brought everything to bear upon his work. He learned 
by teaching. In every crisis of his life he looked 
for guidance from God. The solution of difficult 
questions he sought in prayer ; and the answer 
came sometimes like a flash of light, sometimes as 
the result of profound meditation, but was always 
regarded by him as a Divine inspiration. He studied 
events ; he reflected upon past experiences ; he pro- 
fited by his travels and his reading. Everything, in 
short, furnished him with food for thought, and with 
opportunities for discovering the practical or theo- 



PREFACE. 



retical issues of the faith that he incessantly preached. 
Thus his thinking always kept pace with his outward 
activities ; and till the end there was a constant re- 
action of the one upon the other. Indisputable proofs 
of this will be found, we believe, in the present work. 

It is on this account that we have combined the 
exposition of Paul's doctrine with the history of his 
life. The exegesis of the apostle's writings must 
always start from the latter, and be guided by it. 
The only means of understanding them, whether as 
a whole or in detail, is to explain them by the 
historical circumstances under which they originated. 
Thus restored to their place in history, they are no 
longer treatises in abstract theology ; they are in 
reality acts of Paul's apostolic life, weapons of warfare 
or means of instruction, and living manifestations 
from time to time of the apostle's heart and will, 
as well as of his genius. So they acquire for us, 
together with a singular dramatic interest, a truth and 
life which are absolutely new. 

Thp historical standpoint has another advantage, 
and renders us a further and equally important 
service. It enables us to solve without prejudice 
or violence the important problem which modern 
criticism has raised with regard to the authenticity 
of Paul's epistles. The critics, as is well known, often 
argue, from the literary or dogmatic differences they 
have established amongst them, the impossibility of 
their being the work of one and the same author. 
They take their stand upon the group known as 



PREFACE. 



that of the great epistles — Galatians, Corinthians, and 
Romans ; and peremptorily set aside all those which 
are not exactly of the same type. As if amid 
changing circumstances Paul's manner of writing 
were not bound to undergo like changes I As if, to 
begin with, the epistle to the Romans were not very 
different from the epistle to the Galatians ! It has 
been forgotten that these four letters all belong to a 
period of scarcely three years' duration, from 55 to 
58 A.D. at latest, and that the apostle's career lasted 
for nearly thirty years, What a long space of time 
elapsed, both before and after those momentous years 
spent at Ephesus and Corinth! How can we infer 
with any certainty from the four letters of Paul then 
written what the nature may have been of those he 
wrote at other periods, relating to other questions? 
Who would maintain that the apostle, when travelling 
along with Silvanus and founding the Macedonian or 
Corinthian Churches, wrote in the same strain to these 
young communities as subsequently to the Christians 
of Galatia, at the most exciting stage of his contro- 
versy with his Judaizing opponents ? Furthermore, 
is it probable that, after three or four years' imprison- 
ment, he would indite a letter to his beloved Philip- 
pians precisely like those he had formerly written 
from Ephesus to Corinth, or from Corinth to Rome ? 
The historical doubts accumulated by the criticism 
of Ferdinand C. Baur and his disciples find their 
natural answer in the supposition of historical develop- 
ment in the Pauline system. This assumption docs 



PREFACE. 



not ignore, on the contrary it explains, the differences 
which have been pointed out between the various 
epistles ; nor is it in the least obliged to strain the 
historical exegesis for the purpose of obtaining an 
artificial unity and resemblance. By accepting the 
idea of progress, it makes room for the variations of 
thought and expression which exist. We perceive, 
for instance, that in the epistles to the Colossians, 
Ephesians, and Philippians, the apostle in his moral 
teaching has happily attained larger views of social 
and family duties We observe in the same w r ay that 
from the time of the second letter to the Corinthians, 
while still anticipating the glorious and speedy 
coming of Christ, Paul no longer hopes to see it in 
his lifetime ; already, we find, the foreboding of 
martyrdom shadows his spirit, and has rendered the 
visible triumph and glory of Christ a prospect more 
remote. There is the same development in his 
Christology. But none of these distinctions really 
affect the authenticity of the letters, so soon as we 
discover the chain which links them together, and 
can trace in them a natural and normal development, 
continuous from point to point. 

This is the definite task that the author of this 
volume has endeavoured to accomplish. How far he 
has succeeded in reducing to a progressive series the 
elements previously set in contrast as mutually ex- 
clusive, and in supplying their natural explanation, 
it is not for him, but for his readers impartially to 
decide. In writing this book, he has striven to open 



PREFACE. 



out a path hitherto untrodden in Pauline studies. 
Others may travel farther along it, and with surer 
foot ; in this he will be the first to rejoice. In theo- 
logical science as in practical life he sees servants 
only, working not for themselves but for truth and 
for the kingdom of God. And in offering his work 
to those who may read, or even criticize it, he feels 
that he cannot say to them anything better than that 
which Paul said to the Corinthians respecting their 
preachers : irdvra v/iwv icrriv, elre HavXos, eire 
"AiroXkws, elre K^a^, elre /coa/ios, elre £cor], ecre 
Odvcnos, ecre eveo-rcora, ecre jJueXkovra' irdvra v/jlcov, 
v/nel<> 8e XpiGTOv, XpiGTos he ©eov (i Cor. iii. 22, 23). 

AUGUSTE SABATIER. 



PREFACE. 



*** Besides the Appendix, the English editor has 
thought fit to insert brief foot-notes, inclosed in 
square brackets [thus], on some points of controversy. 
M. Sabatier commands, in the greater part of his 
exposition, an assent so warm and admiring, that it 
is with reluctance one records, here and there, a 
dissent equally decided. He has applied the scientific 
method of modern historical inquiry to the life and 
work of the apostle Paul with great skill and penetra- 
tion, and with a singular charm of treatment, of which 
the reader will be sensible, even through the medium, 
necessarily imperfect, of translation. Possibly, through 
the bias natural to a scholar so versed in historical 
and psychological criticism, he has leaned too heavily 
against the older " ecclesiastical theology." 

It is unnecessary to bespeak for this gifted repre- 
sentative of French Protestant scholarship a friendly 
reception upon English soil. We rejoice to claim 
M. Sabatier, in the words he so aptly quotes from 
the apostle, amongst the all things that are ours. 

G. G. F. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

PAGE 

Preface v-xvi 

Introduction i 



BOOK I. 

The Sources of Paul's System of Thought . 23-94 
I. The First Christian Community at Jerusalem. — 

Christianity and Judaism . 25 

II. Stephen the Precursor of Paul.— Collision between 

the Jewish and the Christian Principle . . 39 

III. Paul's Conversion. — Triumph of the Christian 

over the Jewish Principle 47 

IV. The Genesis of Paul's Gospel . ... 71 



BOOK II. 

First Period, or Period of Missionary Activity 95-134 
I. The Missionary Discourses in the Acts. — The two 

Epistles to the Thessalonians . . .98 

II. Primitive Paulinism 112 

III. First Conflicts with the Judaizing Christians. — The 

Time of Crisis and. Transition .... 124 



CONTENTS. 



BOOK III. 



Second Period ; or, The Period of the Great 

Conflicts 135-21 1 

I. The Epistle to the Galatians ... . . .137 

II. The First Epistle to the Corinthians . . .156 

III. The Second Epistle to the Corinthians . . . 165 

IV. The Epistle to the Romans ..... 185 



BOOK IV. 

Third Period : The Paulinism of Later Times 213-272 
I. The Address at Miletus. — Appearance of the 
Gnostic Asceticism. — New Evolution in Paul's 

Theological Doctrine 214 

II. The Epistles to Philemon, to the Colossians, and 

to the Ephesians 225 

III. The Epistle to the Philippians . . . • . 250 

IV. The Three Pastoral Epistles 263 



BOOK V. 

Organic Form of Paul's Theological System 273-340 
I. The Person of Christ, the Principle of the Christian 

Consciousness . 282 

1 1. The Christian Principle in the Sphere of Psychology 

(Anthropology) . . . . . . . 286 

III. The Christian Principle in the Sphere of Society 
and History (The Religious Philosophy of 

History) 307 

IV. The Christian Principle in the Sphere of Meta- 
physics (Theology) „ . . . . .321 



CONTENTS. 



ADDITIONAL ESSAY ON THE EPISTLES TO 
TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 

PAGE 

"Introduction 343 

I. The Pastoral Epistles in Modern Criticism . . 344 
II. The Vocabulary and Style 353 

III. The Personal Data 362 

IV. The Doctrinal Characteristics .... 374 
V. The Church System of the Pastorals . . . 390 



INTRODUCTION. 

IT is the tendency of all tradition, and of religious 
tradition more especially, to resolve into type 
and symbol the persons of those whom it has once 
enshrined. It is thus that the figures of Christ's first 
apostles have generally assumed a sacredness and 
immutability resembling that of their stone statues 
as we see them ranged in frigid, symmetrical order 
on the front of our cathedrals. And yet these daring 
missionaries of the Christian faith were real men, men 
of their own race and age, each bringing his peculiar 
temperament and genius to bear upon the work that 
it had fallen to their lot to accomplish. It should 
be the aim of history to discover this original and 
distinctive physiognomy beneath legend and dogma, 
the individual life in the traditional type, and, in 
short, the man in the apostle. And such has been 
the end, whether consciously or unconsciously pur- 
sued, of all the work of Biblical criticism and exegesis 
accomplished during the last fifty years. 

Unfortunately, this kind of historical resurrection 
is impossible for the majority of the apostles, whose 
work was, as it were, anonymous, and done in com- 
mon, leaving no personal trace beyond a bare name, 
and that often uncertain and surrounded by legend. 
But with the thirteenth and latest apostle, Paul of 

I 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



Tarsus, the missionary to the Gentiles, the case is 
very different. Not only are we in undoubted pos- 
session of several of his authentic writings, but his 
genius and passion have inspired them with an in- 
tensity of life which renders them the free and 
spontaneous revelation of his soul, — one of the most 
powerful and original that ever came into being. 
True, the beginning and end of his life are involved 
in obscurity ; but thanks to his epistles to the Thes- 
salonians, Corinthians, Galatians, Romans, and Philip- 
pians on the one hand, and the detailed narrative of 
the second part of Acts on the other, we have a vivid 
light thrown upon a period of more than twelve years 
in the very midst of the apostle's career, in which his 
personality stands out with wonderful distinctness. 

Starting from this luminous centre, we are enabled, 
by means of historical and psychological induction, 
to trace the main tenor of his life with a fair amount 
of certainty. For this purpose, dates and places and 
external things are of minor importance. It has been 
our aim to write not a general biography of Paul, 
but a biography of his mind, and the history of his 
thought. 

I. Progressive Character of Paulinism. 

The law of development is so inseparable from the 
idea of life that we always assume its action, even 
when we cannot trace it. In the life of Paul it is 
strikingly obvious. The more we study his writings 
and theology, the more we feel that it was impossible 
for a mind so ardent and so laborious speedily to 
reach its limits and to rest in its final conclusions, 
and that a system of thought so richly and solidly 
constructed could not be completed at a stroke. The 



INTRODUCTION. 



agency of dialectics is equally apparent with that of 
inspiration. At the same time, we must not think 
of the apostle as a professed theologian, absorbed in 
elaborating a speculative system. He was a mis- 
sionary and a preacher. His mind followed the guid- 
ance of circumstances, equally with abstract logic ; it 
developed organically and spontaneously, in response 
to the demand for new solutions or deductions made 
upon it by the course of events. His great soul 
knew no repose ; the thinker kept pace with the 
missionary ; mind and will were at equal tension, 
and within and without were displayed the same 
ardour and the same energy. The Gospel that he 
preached to the heathen had to be freed from Judaism, 
and justified to the Christian understanding by ex- 
perience and by Old Testament exegesis. The man 
who spread the name of Jesus from the borders of 
Palestine to the confines of the West is the same 
who wrote the epistles to the Romans and Colossians ; 
and the distance between Jerusalem and Rome is but 
a type of that much longer road the Gospel traversed 
from the Sermon on the Mount to the Christianity 
of these great epistles. 

The course of development pursued by the apostle's 
doctrine lies between these two limits. Taking its 
departure from the first apostolic preaching, it reaches 
its goal in the theological system to which we have 
just referred. The internal progress of his thought 
corresponds exactly with the external progress of his 
mission ; and both were alike stormy and full of con- 
flict. This history has more than a merely personal 
and psychological interest ; it is virtually the history 
of the revolution which first emancipated Christianity 
and constituted it an independent religion, beyond the 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



sacred inclosure of the Jewish nation. This revolu- 
tion, as we know, had various phases. Paul did not 
in his early days see the full bearing of the liberal 
and individualistic principle that he was introducing 
into the traditional faith, nor all the consequences of 
the work he was doing in the heathen world. They 
only revealed themselves to his understanding pro- 
gressively. He walked bravely, but only by one step 
at a time, in the unknown path at the beginning of 
which, in spite of himself, the very special character 
of his conversion had placed him from the outset. 

We insist on this point, because it is ignored alike 
by those whose theory of a mechanical and wholesale 
theopneustia leaves no room for the workings of the 
apostle's own mind, and by those who make him out 
to have been a sort of speculative genius, creating a 
priori and in solitude the system that he was after- 
wards to preach and defend. Take as an illustration 
one of the great declarations of Paul : his doctrine 
of the abolition of the Mosaic law as a system and a 
means of salvation. It is evident that he reached 
this position by degrees. At first he was able to 
content himself with having obtained at the famous 
conference at Jerusalem (Gal. ii. ; Acts xv.) a dispen- 
sation from circumcision for Christians of heathen 
origin. A few years later this had ceased to satisfy 
him. His mind being of an essentially dialectic- 
cast, he rose from the concrete fact to the absolute 
principle. He had not set out by formulating the 
latter in its abstract generality, but having found from 
experience that the law was of no avail in the salva- 
tion of the Gentiles, it seemed to him no longer 
essential to the Jews ; and he ended by formulating 
in his epistle to the Romans his profound and original 



INTRODUCTION. 5 



theory as to its scope : viz. that its purpose was not 
to save sinners, but on the contrary to multiply sin, 
in order to deliver up the guilty conscience more 
entirely to the grace of God. Examine this theory 
more closely ; you will soon see traces of the violent 
conflicts out of which it was evolved. It is not a 
primitive belief, but a final conclusion — the sum of 
a long experience, and the end of a fierce controversy. 
We might further quote passages from the epistle 
to the Galatians (Gal. i. 10; v. 1 1) which seem to imply 
changes in Paul's conduct with respect to circumcision 
and the Christians of Palestine. But what is the use 
of putting forward uncertain inferences, when we have 
elsewhere a striking proof of the very clear conscious- 
ness the apostle had of the successive modifications 
and constant progress of his Christian views ? How 
many times he laments the incapacity of his efforts 
to grasp all the riches of the Gospel ! " When I was 
a child," he writes to the Corinthians, " I spoke as 
a child, I felt as a child, I reasoned as a child (comp. 
I Cor. iii. i) ; now that I am become a man (comp. 
I Cor. xvi. 13), I have put away childish thoughts." 
Reference is here made, as the parallel passages show, 
to the childhood and maturity of the Christian life. 
Can it be doubted that the mind of the man who 
wrote these words obeyed the natural laws of all 
human knowledge, and that there were elementary 
conceptions which it had already left behind ? In 
fact, this idea of progress is inherent in Paul's theo- 
logy, and essential to it. Even his present knowledge, 
which he regards as that of mature years, does not 
really satisfy him. In the recollection of progress 
achieved he only sees a cause and pledge of further 
progress. The distance separating him from child- 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



hood is but an image to him of that which still 
separates him from the ultimate goal. At no period 
did his conceptions appear to him either complete 
or final. " Now we see as in a dim mirror ; one day 
we shall see face to face. My knowledge is but 
imperfect and partial ; one day I shall know as I have 
been known" (i Cor. xiii. u ff.). 

The older the apostle grew, the more this natural 
feeling strengthened in him. This is how he wrote 
to the Philippians a few years before his death : " I 
do not imagine that I have reached the goal, nor 
obtained perfection ; but I am pursuing it. This one 
thing I do : forgetting the things which are behind 
me, I strenuously press toward those which are before. 
I see the goal, and march on to it" (Phil. iii. 12-16). 
The sequel clearly shows that the progress in question 
has as least as much reference to his mental develop- 
ment as to his moral perfection. " If you think dif- 
ferently from me in anything," he adds, "God shall 
make known the truth to you. Meantime, let us walk 
in unity in the common knowledge which we have 
already attained." 

It would have been astonishing if an idea so natural 
in itself, and so clearly indicated in the text, had not 
been pointed out by modern criticism. But we have 
no such omission to complain of. As soon, in fact, 
as Paul's life and writings began to be studied from 
an historical point of view, the idea of a progressive 
development in his views compelled attention to itself. 
Usteri clearly suggested the idea, in a work of which 
the third edition appeared as early as 1831 ; x but at 
the same time he abandoned it as incapable of de- 

1 Entwickclung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffcs, p. 7. 



INTRODUCTION. 



monstration, because the historical connexion of the 
authentic letters was still undefined, and their chrono- 
logy unsettled, while the great critical epochs of the 
apostle's life were wholly unrecognised. 

The work of reconstruction could not be resumed 
with any chance of success, until the task of patient 
and minute analysis had been first performed. The 
honour of this achievement belongs to Baur. 1 Thanks 
to his critieal studies, abundant light has been thrown 
upon Paul's epistles ; their order of sequence has been 
recovered, their distinctive features clearly defined, 
the historical events that occasioned them perfectly 
established, and their differences marked out not less 
plainly than their resemblances. In short, the first 
and essential conditions for tracing out the apostle's 
mental history were fulfilled. 

It is true that Baur's refusal to recognise as 
authentic anything but the doctrinal type evolved 
from the great central epistles (Galatians, Corinthians, 
and Romans) prevented him from completing this 
task himself. But since then the epistles to the Thes- 
salonians, to Philemon, and to the Philippians have 
asserted their place by the side of these, not to mention 
others whose authenticity is now generally admitted, 
even by the severest critics. Yet the dogmatic dif- 
ferences pointed out by Baur exist all the same. And 
thus, while maintaining the Pauline origin of these 
other writings, and recognising at the same time their 
distinct doctrinal types, modern criticism is shut up 
more and more to a contradiction, of which the only 
and inevitable solution is found in the conception of 

1 Paulus der Apostel Jesu Christie 2nd ed., 1866 [Eng. trans., 
1373]- 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



a progressive development in the apostle's system of 
thought. This solution was still much disputed when 
the first edition of this book appeared [1870]. But at 
the present date, though subject to some modification 
in detail, it has triumphed completely. 

On reviewing, as a whole, those epistles of Paul 
which have been preserved to us, we see that they fall 
naturally into three groups : (1) The epistles to the 
Thessalonians, which appear to be simply an echo of 
his missionary preaching. (2) The great epistles to 
the Galatians, Corinthians, and Romans, the outcome 
of his conflicts with the Judaizers. (3) The epistles 
of the Captivity. Each of these groups contains a 
homogeneous and clearly defined type "of doctrine, 
equally characteristic in its turn of thought and in 
the nature of its polemics. It is no less easy to per- 
ceive that these three types have a logical sequence, 
and correspond exactly with the great periods of the 
apostle's life : the first dominated by his missionary 
activities and interests ; the second by his fierce 
struggle against Judaism ; the third by the appear- 
ance of the Gnostic asceticism. 

Will the establishment of these three periods enable 
us, then, to understand how the doctrine of Paul, by 
virtue of its inner principle and under the outward 
pressure of events, developed from its elementary 
into its higher form ? And will this conception of a 
natural and necessary development solve the problems 
to which the historical exegesis of his epistles has 
given rise ? That is the whole question. 

Our answer lies in the reconstruction that we have 
attempted in this volume, and it will be enough here 
to explain its historical basis and mode of procedure. 



INTRODUCTION. 



We find our starting-point in the middle group of 
Paul's writings — the four great epistles to the Gala- 
tians, Corinthians, and Romans, which are closely 
consecutive and intimately related to each other. The 
system of Paul, eminently dialectic, is here developed 
in its strong antithesis to the Judaistic tendency. 
Here, in the midst of the apostle's career, it presents 
itself in a phase in the highest degree characteristic 
and indisputably genuine. But however important 
and glorious, this stage of Paul's doctrine is not the 
only one, a fact to be carefully borne in mind. These 
letters written one after another from Ephesus, Mace- 
donia, and Corinth during Paul's last missionary 
journey, belong only to one period, and that the short- 
est, of his life, to an interval of three or four years in a 
career which lasted for nearly thirty. Must we forego 
all knowledge — all conjecture even — as to the twenty 
years which preceded, or the six which followed it ? 

Nay, indeed : we are bold to affirm that Paul the 
missionary must have thought and spoken differently 
from the dialectician of these great letters. How 
could they have been understood, unless those who 
received them had had previous preparation ? On 
examining them more nearly, we can plainly see 
that Paul's dialectic expression of thought is due 
to an external fact, to his conflict with Judaism. 
The argument of the apostle cannot be understood 
apart from that of his opponents. In other words, we 
have here an antithesis, the first member of which is 
determined and conditioned by the second. We may 
safely affirm that before the outbreak of Judaistic 
opposition the teaching of Paul could not possibly 
have taken the form and development which this 
opposition alone could give. 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



Now, we are well informed of the origin and date 
of this conflict. It could not have arisen before the 
success of the great missions to the heathen, because 
their success was the cause of it. Besides, we have 
on this point the express declaration of the apostle 
himself in his epistle to the Galatians (chap. i. 18-24). 
He went, he tells us, three years after his conversion 
to visit and confer with Peter at Jerusalem. From 
thence he went to Syria and Cilicia, and the Churches 
of Judaea rejoiced and gave thanks for his ministry 
in those regions. The controversy, therefore, did not 
then exist. It only broke out fourteen years later 
(Gal. ii. 1), when the Pharisaic Christians came to 
Antioch and tried to force circumcision upon the 
heathen converts. Here then is an earlier and pro- 
longed period, during which the doctrine of Paul, 
developing under other conditions and amid other 
conflicts, must inevitably have taken a simpler, a more 
practical and general form. Can we discover the 
moment at which the crisis that transformed it came 
about ? 

At the conference of Jerusalem (Gal. ii. ; Acts xv.) 
new and weighty questions presented themselves to 
Paul's mind ; but they were not at once solved. He 
contented himself, as we have said already, with 
having secured for the heathen a dispensation from 
circumcision. The epistles to the Thessalonians, 
written a little later, are still without any sign of 
contention with Judaizers. Evidently the apostle has 
left Jerusalem and set out on his second missionary 
journey fully satisfied with his victory, and without 
any anxiety as to the future. The precise moment 
of the crisis must therefore have occurred between the 
epistles to the Thessalonians and the epistle to the 



INTRODUCTION. 



Galatians. What happened in this interval? The 
violent dispute between Peter and Paid at Antioch 
(Gal. ii. n-21), 1 and all that the recital of it reveals 
to us : the arrival of messengers from James in the 
Gentile Christian community, and the counter-mission 
organized by the Judaizers to rectify the work of Paul. 
It was this new situation, suddenly presenting itself 
to the apostle on his return from his second missionary 
journey, which by compelling him to enter the con- 
test, led him to formulate in all its rigour his prin- 
ciple of the abrogation of the law (Gal. ii. 16). 

While admitting a development in Paul's doctrine 
during this long and obscure primitive period, some 
may perhaps consider that it ceased with the epistle 
to the Galatians. Now, they would say, it has come 
to realize its essential principle ; it cannot make 
further progress. No doubt this epistle marks an 
epoch in the apostle's life ; but it is a point of de- 
parture, rather than a halting place ; it inaugurates a 
new era. Far from being at rest, the mind of Paul 
was never more active and eager, never more fertile 
than during this stormy period. Involved from the 
first in the glaring antithesis of law and faith, his mind 
strives to get beyond and above it to a loftier point of 
view, from which he may bring about its synthesis, 
by the subordination of the one principle to the other. 

In the epistles to the Corinthians his view had 
already expanded beyond these limits, and in the 
epistle to the Romans it is transformed ; larger pro- 



1 We place this event not at the return of Paul to Antioch 
after the conference at Jerusalem ("Acts xv. 33), but at his 
return from his second missionary journey (Acts xviii. 23). 
Thus Neander, Wieseler, Renan, etc. 



THE AP0S7LE PAUL. 



spects open before it. But there is no more reason 
for arresting his mental progress at Romans than at 
Galatians. New events and an altered situation lead 
to a new expansion of thought. 

The last period of his life is of an entirely peculiar 
character, determined by certain leading facts. To 
begin with, Paul was in prison. This captivity, in 
snatching him from the duties and conflicts of his mis- 
sionary work, afforded him leisure ; it sentenced him 
to solitude and to meditation. Furthermore, there was 
springing up a tendency at once ascetic and specu- 
lative, a sort of early Gnosticism, which invaded Paul's 
Churches and threatened to ruin them. Naturally, 
and logically, these errors called forth a fresh develop- 
ment of the apostle's doctrine, more speculative and 
more theological than the other two. Thus it reached 
its highest level in the epistles of the Captivity. 

The three periods of Paul's life which we have in- 
dicated, are as follows : 

First Period. — Primitive Paidinism : From the 
conversion of Paul to the epistle to the Galatians. 
Documents : The missionary discourses in the Acts, 
and the epistles to the Thessalonians. This is the 
adolescence of the apostle's system of thought. 

Second Period. — The Paidinism of the great 
epistles: From the epistle to the Galatians to the 
imprisonment of Paul. Documents : the epistles to 
the Galatians, Corinthians, and Romans. This is the 
virile and heroic age of his mind. 

THIRD PERIOD. — Paidinism of later days: From 
the beginning of his captivity until his death. Docu- 
ments : the epistles to Philemon, Colossians, Ephe- 
sians, and Philippians ; the parallel record of the Acts 
of the Apostles (Acts xx. to the end), especially the 



IN TR OD UC T/OAT. 1 3 



discourse at Miletus. This is the age of perfect and 
full maturity. 

Such is the course and plan of this history. To 
these three essential divisions two more must be 
added : the first, in which the historical and psycho- 
logical origin of Paul's theology will be set forth ; and 
the last, a necessary conclusion to our history, in which 
we shall endeavour to explain his theological system 
in its definitive form, and to sketch its organism. 

II. Chronology. 

Before commencing our narrative, it is important 
to fix as nearly as possible the chronology of the 
apostle's life. 

Let us admit, to begin with, that the dates of his 
birth and death are completely lost to us. For us, 
his historical career ends at the year 63 or 64 A.D. 
The writer of the Acts leaves him in his prison at 
Rome two years after he had entered it. From that 
time we know nothing of him. Did he perish in the 
burning of the city (July, A.D. 64), or in the persecution 
which followed ? Was he released ? Did he go to 
Spain, as he intended ? Did he come back to the 
East and return to Rome, to die on the same day as 
Peter in 67 or 68 A.D., according to Catholic tradition ? 
On all these points we have nothing but idle con- 
jecture or legends. 

Nor are we any better informed as to the date 
of his birth. The only two indications of which we 
can avail ourselves, are the epithet veavias applied to 
him by Luke (Acts vii. 58) at the time of Stephen's 
stoning, and that of irpecrf3vT7)<; which he applies to 
himself in his epistle to Philemon, written about A.D. 
60. These two expressions are very vague ; and it is 



14 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



even necessary to strain them a good deal in order 
to make them agree. The latter and more authentic 
reference proves that in A.D. 60 Paul had at least 
passed his fiftieth year. Give him a few years more, 
and he is almost exactly contemporary with Jesus. 
This much must be admitted, if we are to give any 
credit to an indication from the oratio encomiastica 
in principes apostolorum Petrum et Paulum> wrongly 
ascribed to Chrysostom, but which is found in his 
works. We read there, in effect, that Paul died in 
his sixty-eighth year (67 or 68 A.D.), after having 
served the Lord for thirty-five years. This last figure 
is exaggerated ; but at all events, Paul was born at 
Tarsus about the beginning of the Christian era. 

What is of more importance is to fix the principal 
dates of his life. To this end we must first seek in 
his long career for a date, perfectly established, which 
may serve for our point of departure and a basis of 
all our calculations. It is not to be found till the 
close of his history. We may determine beyond dis- 
pute, almost to a year, the date of his departure to 
Rome from the prison at Caesarea. We know that 
he was sent thither by Porcius Festus, a few months 
after the arrival of that governor in Palestine (Acts 
xxiv. 27). Now the arrival of Festus could not pos- 
sibly have taken place earlier than 60, nor later than 

62 A.D., because he was succeeded in the summer of 

63 by Albinus. (Compare the following data : Tacitus, 
Ann. xiv. 65 ; Josephus, Ant. xx. 8. 9, n ; Bell. Jud. 
vi. 5. 3; De vita 3.) We can only hesitate therefore 
between the years 60 and 61. We prefer 60, because 
even with this date the mission of Festus would only 
have lasted two years ; and one year seems too short 
a space for all the events narrated by Josephus. 



INTRODUCTION. 



From the narrative of the Acts we gather that Paul 
embarked for Rome in the autumn, and that Festus 
had entered upon office some months before, at the 
beginning of summer. The apostle had then been 
in prison for two full years ; which fixes the begin- 
ning of his captivity at the Pentecost of 58 (or 59) A.D. 
(Acts xxi. 27-33). Looking backwards from this 
point, we can trace accurately the course of Paul's 
life. He had kept the Passover of this same year 
at Philippi in Macedonia (xx. 6), having arrived there 
from Corinth, where he had spent the three months 
of winter (57-8, or 58-9), and written his epistle to the 
Romans. He had therefore reached Corinth towards 
the end of 57 (or 8) A.D. How he was occupied during 
the previous year we know very certainly from his two 
letters to the Corinthians, the second of which was 
written in Macedonia in the autumn, and the first 
at Ephesus about the time of the previous Passover 
(1 Cor. xvi. 8; v. 7 ; 2 Cor. ii. 12, 13). The remarkable 
agreement, during this period of Paul's life, between 
the data given in his great epistles and those of the 
Acts gives to this latter record a peculiar authority, 
and shows that we are standing on firm historical 
ground. 

From the address delivered by Paul at Miletus after 
the Passover of 58 (or 59) A.D., we learn that he had 
sojourned three years at Ephesus, or in the province 
of Asia, so that he must have arrived there in the 
spring of 55. He came thither from Antioch, where 
he had spent the winter of 54-55 recruiting after his 
second missionary journey, the occasion on which, 
according to all probability, he had his sharp dis- 
pute with Peter and Barnabas (Gal. ii. 11-15, and 
Acts xviii, 22, 23). Paul had then returned, as we 



1 6 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

have already said, from his great journey through 
Asia, Macedonia, and Achaia (Acts xvi.-xviii.) This 
journey eannot have occupied less than two years, or 
two years and a half, since the stay at Corinth alone 
consumed more than eighteen months (Acts xviii. 
n). This obliges us to place the beginning of the 
journey in the spring of 52, and the conference at 
Jerusalem, from which Paul was then returning, in 
the winter of 51-52 A.D. (xv. 30 ; Gal. ii. 1). 

All this chronology of the second half of Paul's life, 
derived partly from his own epistles and partly from 
the narrative in Acts given by an eye-witness in the 
first person, is, so to speak, forced upon us ; for it 
will be readily admitted, however questionable some 
of the details of our calculation may be, that a period 
of seven years (51-58) is not too long to embrace 
all the events of his life and the results of his acti- 
vity during this period, of which we have such exact 
and certain knowledge. There is one circumstance 
connected with Paul's life at Corinth, moreover, 
that affords us an approximate verification. The 
apostle on his arrival in that city met with a Jewish 
couple named Aquila and Priscilla, who had been ex- 
pelled from Rome by a decree of the Emperor Claudius 
(Acts xviii. 1-3). If we knew the date of this edict, 
referred to elsewhere by Suetonius (Vit. Claud. 25) 
and Tacitus {Ann. xii. 52, 54), we should have the^ 
exact date of the sojourn of Paul at Corinth. From 
the allusions of the two Roman historians we can only 
conjecture that the measure belongs to the later 
years of the reign of Claudius. Orosius, who suggests 
the seventh year, is not to be relied upon. Now 
Claudius died in September, 54 A.D. Paul must there- 
fore have reached Corinth, at any rate, before that 



INTRODUCTION. 17 



year. If the edict was issued, as the best critics sup- 
pose, in 52, there is obviously a sufficient agreement 
between this result and that which we had pre- 
viously reached by an entirely different method. We 
have yet another, and a more certain datum in the 
Achaian proconsulate of Gallio, brother of Seneca 
(Acts xviii. 12). From the life of this personage, 
which we can easily trace, we find that he did not 
obtain this appointment to Achaia till the end of 
Claudius' life (Tacitus, Ann. xv. 73 ; Dio Cass., lx. 35 ; 
Pliny, xxxi. 33, etc.). 

It now remains to establish the chronology of the 
former half of Paul's apostolic career, as we have just 
determined that of the second. Here our starting 
point must of necessity be the date of the conference 
at Jerusalem, to which we have already referred — 
the winter of 51-52 A.D. It will be observed that it 
cannot be fixed later than 52, because of the date of 
Claudius' death, to which we have just alluded ; and 
this is the important point. Accordingly, the majority 
of chronologists are divided between the years 51 
and 52 (Hug, Eichhorn, Anger, de Wette, etc.). This 
may content us. Paul has given an account of the 
conference in his epistle to the Galatians, and we do 
not think that the parallelism between Galatians ii. 
and Acts xv. can be seriously called in question. This 
being the case, we have from the pen of Paul himself 
all the materials for a precise chronology. We know 
that at the beginning of his epistle he defines in the 
clearest manner his relations with the Twelve, and the 
exact number of his visits to Jerusalem — two in all — 
up to that time, including the apostolic conference. 
In such an argument it is plain he could not possibly 
omit a single visit, for such omission would have laid 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



him open to the charge of falsehood. We must there- 
fore consider the journey mentioned in Acts xi. 30 as 
apocryphal, 1 it being positively excluded by the de- 
claration of Paul himself (Gal. i. 22). It is plain that 
the first half of Acts is not of the same historical 
worth as the second, and that its statements must be 
tested by the evidence of the authentic epistles. Of 
this we have further proof. If Luke adds a journey 
of Paul to Jerusalem, he omits the journey to Arabia 
(Gal. i. 17). He has no precise idea of the time 
which elapsed between the conversion of Paul and 
his first visit to the apostles (Acts ix. 23 : r^ikpai 
LKaval = three years, according to Gal. i. 18). We 
cannot therefore depend upon him as before, and 
must not venture beyond the statement of the apostle 
himself. 

Happily this account is as explicit as it is vigorous 
and concise. Paul relates that he paid his first visit 
to Peter and James at Jerusalem three years after his 
conversion (Gal. i. 18). He only spent fifteen days with 
them. Then he went to preach the Gospel in Syria 
and Cilicia. The Churches of Judaea had not even 
seen his face. It was not till fourteen years after- 
wards that he made his second journey to Jerusalem, 
on the occasion of the apostolic conference (Gal. ii. 
1). Since this conference, as we have already pointed 
out, was held in 51-52 A.D., in order to ascertain 

[ l But Acts xi. 29, 30; xii. 25 say nothing which implies that 
on this occasion Paul met the chiefs of the Church at Jerusalem, 
or made himself "known by face to the Churches of Jud?ea. ; ' 
The gift was sent " to the elders " ; and at a time of severe 
persecution (Acts xii. 1), therefore probably in a secret and 
expeditious way. For all that Luke says, Paul himself may not 
even have set foot in Jerusalem.] 



WTR OD UCTION. i 9 



exactly the date of his conversion, we must find out 
from what point he himself reckons these fourteen 
years. In our opinion, there is no room for doubt. 
The adverb ttuXlv (Gal. ii. i), showing that Paul was 
accounting for his visits to the Holy City ; the pre- 
position hia which he uses here (instead of /xera, which 
we find in i. 18), indicating the time during which 
he affirms that he had not set foot in Jerusalem, 
prove beyond a doubt that the terminus a quo of the 
number fourteen is his first journey, previously men- 
tioned (Gal. i. 1 8), not the event of his conversion. 
To obtain the date of the latter, then, we must add 
the fourteen years spent in Syria and Cilicia to the 
three years previously spent in Arabia, or at Damascus. 
Paul, therefore, had been a Christian seventeen years 
when he came to attend the conference at Jerusalem 
in 51 or 52; and this carries back the date of his 
conversion to the year 35 A.D., at the latest. 

The only objection that can be made to this date, 
which is not, we admit, the one generally received 
(this varies between the years u and 42), is that the 
murder of Stephen must then have occurred before 36 
A.D. — that is, before the recall of Pilate. And this, it is 
argued, is improbable; for Pilate, if still in office, would 
not have allowed a murder which amounted on the 
part of the Jews to a usurpation of judicial power. 
But on what a thread hung Paul's life in the like cir- 
cumstances (Acts xxi. 31) ! The execution of Stephen, 
occurring in a popular riot, might have happened 
before the Romans were aware. And it is as easy to 
assume a temporary absence of Pilate, as a subsequent 
interregnum ; in which latter case, moreover, the au- 
thority of Rome would not be left without a represen- 
tative. The uncertain inference drawn from Luke's 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



narrative could not, in any case, be maintained in face 
of Paul's definite statements ; and we can only over- 
throw the date of 35 A.D. for his conversion by over- 
throwing that of 52 for the conference at Jerusalem. 
This latter once established, the remainder of the cal- 
culation is a matter of course. 

The history of Damascus, as we find to our regret, 
is too obscure for us to avail ourselves of the allusion 
made by Paul in 2 Corinthians xi. 32. At the time of 
his conversion there was still in that city an ethnarch, 
representing Aretas the king. The Romans may 
very well have been able to leave the government of 
Damascus to a vassal until 36 A.D. But immediately 
after this time, and before the death of Tiberius, war 
broke out between king Aretas on the one side, and 
Herod Antipas and Rome on the other ; so that it 
Is impossible to see how the king of Arabia could 
have retained any later the authority and privileges 
hitherto allowed him in Damascus. This suggests a 
further indirect confirmation of 35 A.D. as the date of 
Paul's conversion, which we had arrived at by another 
calculation. 

It only remains for us, returning to the close of the 
apostle's life, to put together the slender indications 
that we have of its date. He embarked for Rome 
in the autumn of 60 (or 61) A.D. ; but was compelled 
by shipwreck to winter in the island of Malta, and 
only reached the Eternal City in the spring of 61 
(62). Luke adds that he remained there as a prisoner 
for two years, living in a private house under the 
guard of a soldier ; then his narrative breaks off 
abruptly, and we are confronted with the unknown 
(Acts xxviii. 30)* Paul is supposed to have perished 
in the frightful persecution caused by the fire of Rome 



INTRODUCTION. 



in July, 64 A.D. At the same time, we would point 
out that the two years of imprisonment mentioned 
by Luke at the end of his book, ending, according to 
our chronology, in the spring of 63 — or, extending our 
calculation by a year, in the spring of 64 — must in any 
case have come to an end before the events of the fire, 
and the persecution, which cannot have broken out 
until August or September. All that is certain is 
that he died a martyr at Rome, under Nero (Clemens 
Romanus : 1 Epist. ad Corinth, v.). 

Paul's apostolic career, as known to us, lasted, 
therefore, twenty-nine or thirty years ; and it falls 
into three distinct periods, which are summarized in 
the following chronological table : 

First Period. — Essentially Missionary. 

35 A.D. Conversion of Paul. Journey to Arabia. 

38. First visit to Jerusalem. 

38-49. Mission in Syria and Cilicia. Tarsus and 
Antioch. 

50-51. First missionary journey. Cyprus, Pam- 
phylia, and Galatia (Acts xiii., xiv.). 

52. Conference at Jerusalem (Acts xv. ; Gal. ii.). 

52-55. Second missionary journey. Epistles to the 
Thessalonians (from Corinth). 

Second Period. — The Great Conflicts, and the 
Great Epistles. 

54. Return to Antioch. Controversy with Peter 
(Gal. ii. 12-22). 

55-57. Mission to Ephesus and Asia. 

56. Epistle to the Galatians. 

57, or 58 (Passover). First Epistle to the Corin- 
thians (Ephesus). 



22 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

57, or 58 (Autumn). Second Epistle to the Corin- 
thians (Macedonia). 

58 (Winter). Epistle to the Romans. 

Third Period. — The Captivity. 

58, or 59 (Pentecost). Paul is arrested at Jerusalem. 
58-60, or 59-61. Captivity at Caesarea. Epistles to 

Philemon y Colossians, and Ephesians. 

60, or 61 (Autumn). Departure for Rome. 

61, or 62 (Spring). Arrival of Paul in Rome. 
62-63. Epistle to the Philippians. 

63, or 64. End of the narrative of the Acts of the 
Apostles. 

Note. — The Pastoral epistles (so called) of necessity 
lie outside the known life of Paul. Their authenticity 
will be discussed afterwards. 



BOOK I. 

THE SOURCES OE PAULS SYSTEM OE 
THOUGHT. 

THE sources of Paul's system of thought are to 
be discovered in these three facts : in the 
Pharisaism which he forsook, the Christian Church 
which he entered, and the conversion by which he 
passed from the one to the other. 

The first of these facts to be considered is the 
existence of the Church. It is sometimes forgotten 
that a Christian community existed before Paul, 
hitherto its fierce persecutor, came to join its ranks. 
This conversion, while opening a new era in his life, 
was at the same time a bond of close connexion with 
primitive Christianity, and obliges us to look beyond 
Paul himself for the origin of his Christian belief. 

Furthermore, his conversion marked a crisis in the 
development of the apostolic Church. However un- 
expected it may have been, this event, we must 
confess, was wonderfully opportune. At no other 
time could it have had the same import or the same 
consequences. We could not have understood its 
earlier occurrence, before the death of Stephen ; nor 
later, when the missions to the heathen had been 
already set on foot. But happening just when it did, 
it seems to us the most weighty fact of this first age. 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



And it is so closely linked with the past which it 
crowns, and the future which it. inaugurates, that to 
view it apart from its historical connexion is a thing 
impossible. 

It is indeed in this connexion, and invested with 
this critical importance, that the conversion of Paul is 
presented to us in the Acts of the Apostles. If we 
study the course of this narrative with a little atten- 
tion, we shall perceive in it three stages, constituting 
by their logical sequence an internal progress within 
the primitive Christian community, of which Paul's 
conversion is the goal and natural conclusion. 

I. The first stage is represented by the first five 
chapters of the Acts. Judaism and Christianity are 
still closely united and blended in the creed of the 
first Christians. Acts i.-v. : Union of the spirit of 
Christianity with Jeivish tradition. 

II. The second stage is marked by the episode of 
Stephen. The conflict between the Jewish and 
Christian principles, hitherto latent, breaks out in the 
most violent manner in the speech and the death of 
the martyr. Acts vi., vii. : Open struggle between the 
Jewish and Christian principles. 

III. The conversion of Paul is the third stage. 
The conflict between the two principles, undetermined 
by brute force, ends within the breast of Saul the 
Pharisee, by the radical negation of the one and the 
triumphant affirmation of the other. Acts ix. : Triumph 
of the Christia?i over the Jewish principle. 

Such is the progressive course of Luke's narrative ; 
and it is in this historic sequence, and under this light, 
that we must place and study the great event that 
made Saul the apostle to the Gentiles. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY AT JERUSALEM. 
— CHRISTIANITY AND JUDAISM. 

THE first beginnings of the Christian Church are 
involved in obscurity. For the period that 
elapsed between the death of Jesus and the conver- 
sion of Saul, of which we do not even know the 
length, we have absolutely no information beyond 
that afforded by the much-disputed record given in the 
Acts of the Apostles. 1 But this obscure period lies 

1 \Ye attach no value to the patristic, or heretical traditions of 
the second century. They would not, we think, have deserved 
even the honour of a critical discussion, if the results of Baur's 
researches had not invested them for a time with some appear- 
ance of credit. How is it possible to discuss with any serious- 
ness the historical value of the narratives and descriptions of 
the Clementine Homilies, — that romance in which the dreams 
of the Gnostic are mingled with the fastidious scruples of the 
Pharisee ? They are not popular traditions, but the work of 
fancy ; and one cannot think the representation they give of 
Peter any more lifelike than that of the Apostle Paul. The 
famous portrait of James furnished by Hegesippus, and pre- 
served for us by Eusebius, has been, it is true, much more insisted 
on : Ovros Zk KOiAt'as rr}<; //.77-pos avrov ayio? i]V oivov ko\ 
criKtpa ovk Ittici', ovoe efixj/v)(ov e^ayev tvpov km tijv KecfiaXijv 
avTov ovk ave/3-i]' eXaiov ovk ijXcLif/aTO kcu /?aAavet'u> ovk ^XPV' 
o~a.ro- toito) [tovia k^rjv eis to. ayia eicrierar ov$e yap Zptovv 



26 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

between two other points of history with which we 
are somewhat better acquainted. On one side is 
Paul's testimony, which throws light on the course of 
things previous to his conversion ; on the other, from 
what we know of the life and teaching of Jesus we 
can infer, with a tolerable degree of certainty, the 
position of the disciples immediately after His de- 
parture. Thus two luminous rays from opposite 
points focus themselves on this obscure interval, and 

i<j>6pei aUci crtVSovas, kclI ficn'os elcrrjp^cTo cts rov vabv, k.t.A.., 
H. E. ii. 23. What is there in this tradition or legend but a purely 
ideal portrait? Its elements are derived, not from popular 
tradition, but directly from the Old Testament. They are made 
up of the vows of the Nazarite, the customs of the Pharisees, 
or perhaps the Essenes, and the prerogatives of the High 
Priest : comp. Num. vi. 3, etc., and Lev. vi. 3, in the Septuagint. 
The writer did not himself believe that James had ever been 
High Priest, or worn a linen robe, or had sole right of entrance 
to the temple — a fact sufficiently proving that his intention was 
to draw an ideal portrait. And when, on the other hand, he 
says that James was sanctified from his mother's womb, and 
drank neither wine nor strong drink, and that no razor ever 
touched his head, he was evidently thinking of the birth of 
John the Baptist (Luke i. 15), or of Samson (Judges xiii. 4). 
Abstinence from meat, from ointment and the bath, was still 
a feature of Jewish sanctity, and distinguished the Jewish fast, 
in the days of Jesus (Matt. vi. 17). To the imagination of the 
second century, this ascetic and Levitical righteousness seemed 
the highest ideal of piety ; and the writer therefore wished to 
represent the life of James as that of a Nazarite and perpetual 
priest. Since James was not High Priest, is it any more certain 
that he was an ascetic ? The epistle which bears his name 
gives quite a different idea of him. Instead of commending 
legal sanctity, it rather opposes it (i. 27). In place of the pre- 
judices of the Levite or Nazarite, he gives us reminiscences of 
the Sermon on the Mount. Moreover, the categorical state- 
ment of Paul (1 Cor. ix. 5) authorizes us to believe that James, 



THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. 27 

they seem to us to set it in a fairly vivid light. Let us 
first, therefore, gather the testimony of Paul, since this 
alone can furnish a safe starting point for our inquiry. 
The grand controversy maintained by Paul against 
the Judaizers proves clearly enough the distinctly 
Jewish character of the primitive Christian com- 
munity. It does not prove, however, that this com- 
munity was a mere Jewish sect, hardly distinguished 



like Peter, was married, which is hardly consistent with the 
account of Hegesippus. 

Nor is James the only one who has been thus idealized. In 
the second century all the apostles were represented as priests, 
or ascetics. Thus Clement of Alexandria states that Matthew 
abstained from meat and lived only upon vegetables {Pcedag. 
ii. 1). In the same way Polycrates, in his letter to Victor, 
bishop of Rome, depicts John with the attributes of the High 
Priest (05 SyevrjOrj icpevs to -xiraXov Tree^op^Kcos, H.E. iii. 31). 
Finally, about the same period, we find a legend arising which 
makes Jesus Himself a priest, descended from the tribe of 
Levi, as well as from that of Judah {Testament of the Twelve 
Patriarchs, Levi 2 ; Simeon 7). On the origin and specific 
character of these traditions, see Ritschl, Die Entstehung der 
altkatholische?i Kirche, 2nd edition, p. 178. These traditions, 
while giving us very useful and accurate information about the 
spirit of the second century, teach us nothing whatever about 
the rise of the Church ; and they are amongst the best proofs 
which can be adduced to show that the Acts of the Apostles 
was of earlier date than the period at which they originated. 

In seeking to ascertain the ideas of the primitive Christians, 
we should be better warranted in making use of the epistle of 
James, the Apocalypse, or the Gospel of Matthew, which be- 
long to Judaeo-Christian Christianity. But this would bring us 
to the same result as that already obtained, only by a more 
uncertain route. The authors of these writings are profoundly 
Jewish ; but no one can deny that they have got beyond 
Judaism, and that their creed already embraced the specific 
principle of the new religion. 



28 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



from that of the Pharisees. On the contrary, Paul 
himself held, and conveys to us, a very different idea 
of it. The manner in which he regarded this society, 
both before and after his conversion, is a decisive 
proof that he discerned in it an essentially new ele- 
ment. To this his former hatred and his subsequent 
devotion alike testify. 

Let us hear what he says of this Church : "You know," 
he writes to the Galatians, " how I lived in Judaism. 
I persecuted the Church of God beyond measure, and 
laid it waste ; . . . being full of zeal for the tra- 
ditions of our fathers" (Gal. i. 13, 14). It is remark- 
able, to begin with, that Paul never speaks of his past 
life without associating as cause and effect his zeal 
for Judaism and his hatred of the Christians : iSlco/cov 
ti)p eKK\7](Tiav...^7]\a)T7]^ virdpyoav ; comp. Philippians 
iii. 5> 6, Kara vojxov <I>apL(TaLo$, Kara £77X09 Skokcov ttjv 
eKKKrjaiav. In the eyes of the jealous Pharisee, it 
was a merit to persecute this new enemy of the faith 
of his fathers. His observation, quickened by fana- 
ticism, detected from the first under the Jewish 
exterior of the Church that which so many modern 
critics fail to recognise. 

In the second place, Paul calls this primitive 
Christian community the Church of God, ttjv erc/cXr)- 
aiav tov Qeov (Gal. i. 13, and 1 Cor. xv. 9) ; on another 
occasion, simply and par excellence, ttjv eKK\r)aiav (Phil, 
iii. 6) [/he Church]. He calls the first Christians, of 
whom he knew a great number, by the new name 
of a&€\(f)ol (1 Cor. xv. 6) [the brethren] ; or else 
" the saints," ol aywi(i Cor. xvi. 1 ; Rom. xv. 31). He 
sets them before the Thessalonian Church as models, 
which he is glad to see them imitate. "You, brethren, 
became imitators of the Churches of God which are i?i 



THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. 29 

Jud<za, in Christ Jesus : for you have suffered the same 
evils from your fellow citizens which they did from 
the Jews, who have killed the Lord Jesus, and per- 
secuted us" (1 Thess. ii. 14, 15). The recollection of 
having persecuted the Church of God continued 
throughout Paul's life to be a cause of grief and 
humiliation to him. He laments for it, as if he had 
persecuted the Lord Himself. On this account he 
reckons himself last of the apostles, unworthy even 
to be called an apostle ; he calls himself an abortion, 
the chief of sinners (1 Cor. xv. 8 ; 1 Tim. i. 13-15). 

It is not the case then that there were two gospels, 
the gospel of the Twelve and the Pauline gospel, 
each the negation of the other. Paul found himself 
in fellowship with the primitive Church. His faith 
rested on the same foundation. The legitimate 
existence of two apostlcsliips, one appointed for the 
evangelization of the Jew and the other for that of 
the Gentile, he did indeed admit ; but never of two 
essentially different gospels. He acknowledged but 
one Gospel, which saved equally and in the same way 
both Jew and Gentile. " If any man preach another, 
let him be anathema" (Rom. i. 16 ; Gal. i. 7-9). 

Here we are confronted with the passage in Galatians 
ii. 7-9: "When they saw that I had been intrusted 
with the gospel of the uncircumcision, as Peter with 
the gospel of the circumcision (He that wrought in 
Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision, having 
wrought in me also for the evangelization of the 
Gentiles), — recognising, I say, the grace that has 
been committed to me, they gave me the right hand 
of fellowship." Here, it is said, we have the two 
gospels clearly defined and contrasted with each 
other : evayyeXtov tt}? aKpoftvaTias, evayyekiov tt)? 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



irepLTOfjifj^. But who does not see that by these two 
genitives Paul meant to indicate, not the dogmatic 
content, but the twofold destination of the Gospel ? 
Besides, these words are clearly explained in the 
succeeding verse, where the equivalent terms are sub- 
stituted : tt}? irepiTo^r]^ — e/? aTroaroXrjv t% irepirofjirj^ ; 
t% dfcpofivarias — et? ra eQvrj. And, what is more, the 
apostle ascribes these two apostleships and the abun- 
dant fruit they bore to one and the same act of God : 
6 jap evepytjaas Her pa* . . . /ca/jLoL If two hostile 
and contradictory gospels are in question, it must be 
admitted that Paul attributes them equally to God as 
their supreme Author — a crying absurdity ! We have 
here not a dogmatic definition, but an ethnographical 
delimitation of two missionary fields. The apostles 
were able, therefore, without any hypocrisy to give 
to each other the right hand of fellowship ; they felt 
themselves to be standing on a common basis, which 
was broad enough to support them all. 

What was this common foundation, this identical 
content of the twofold preaching, which, belonging 
equally to both fields of labour, for that very reason 
may be regarded as the primitive Gospel ? Paul has 
stated it for us in the opening verses of the fifteenth 
chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians. There 
he sums up the Gospel that he had preached at 
Corinth, " I remind you," he says, " of the gospel 
which I announced unto you, that which also I 
received, wherein ye abide firmly, by which ye are 
saved. . . . Among the chief things (Iv Trpcorois), 
I taught you that Christ died for our sins, according 
to the Scriptures ; that He was buried ; and that He 
was raised on the third day, according to the Scrip- 
tures." Then, after referring to the different appear- 



THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. 31 

ances of the risen Jesus, he adds : " This is zvhat we 
preach, whether it be I or they (the Twelve) ; and this 
is what you believed!' These last words apply not only 
to the appearances recorded above, but to the entire 
summary of the apostle's preaching as just given. 

Another passage in the same epistle, no less inte- 
resting to study, shows us how the apostle estimated 
the work that was being done by others alongside with 
himself, and that which had been done before him in 
the Church : " According to the grace of God which 
was given unto me, I have like a wise architect laid 
the foundation, and another is building upon it. Let 
each man take care how he builds upon it. No 
other foundation can be laid than that which has 
been already laid, — namely, Jesus Christ" (iii. 10, 11). 
So far from reproaching Peter with having built on 
a different foundation, Paul reckons him among the 
number of those who were labouring at God's build- 
ing. He neither commends nor blames him, leaving 
to God the office of appraising the work of each 
(iii. 22). In the epistle to the Ephesians, Paul calls 
this primitive foundation 6e[ik\iov rcou <jlito<jto\wv 
(ii. 20) ; and, farther on, he adds that the mystery of 
Christ has been revealed to His holy apostles and pro- 
phets, as never in former ages (iii. 5). 1 

We see with what absolute sincerity Paul attached 
himself to the primitive Church. Does not this 
evidence justify us in inferring the twofold character, 
both Jewish and Christian, of this original com- 
munity ? Had it not been Jewish in its manner of 



1 We are aware that the authenticity of these two last pas- 
sages is questioned. But we only quote them as confirming 
the previous citation. 



32 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

life and its hopes, the struggles and schisms that 
followed would be inexplicable. But if, on the other 
hand, it had not in the midst of its Judaism held fast 
to the new principle of the Gospel, Saul would never 
have left Pharisaism for a sect which continued so 
much like it ; at all events, he would not after his 
conversion have remained in communion with it. 

Between Jesus and Paul, then, the Church at Jeru- 
salem formed a necessary connecting link. The sub- 
sequent course of events can only be satisfactorily 
explained by the original alliance existing in the faith 
and life of the first Christians between the Gospel of 
Jesus Christ and traditional Judaism. It is, in fact, the 
combination of these two fundamentally hostile prin- 
ciples which gives to this first period of the Church's 
history its peculiar and primitive character. 

In order to understand this unique historical situa- 
tion, we must carry our thoughts back to the morrow 
of the death of Jesus. The attitude assumed by the 
disciples toward Judaism was the consequence and 
continuation of that in which the Master Himself had 
stood. 

Now, the position of Jesus in regard to the national 
religion had a twofold aspect. He was emphatically 
a Jew ; He sought to fulfil all righteousness. His 
life was entirely confined within the limits of Judaism. 
Nothing is more remarkable than the way in which 
He has succeeded in bringing about, without any 
violence, the greatest revolution that has ever taken 
place. He brought into the world in His own 
person a new principle of religious life. In pre- 
senting Himself as the object of faith and love, He 
instituted a new righteousness, and opened to men 



THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. 33 

a new way of salvation. Thus He supplied another 
fulcrum in place of that on which the religious con- 
sciousness of His disciples previously rested, substi- 
tuting for their traditional faith an absolute devotion 
to His person. When He met with a tradition of the 
elders, or even an article of the law which opposed 
the application of the new principle, He brushed it 
aside with a sovereign authority. But His reforms 
were, nevertheless, as free from violence as His rever- 
ence and obedience were from weakness. Jesus never 
formally abrogated the authority of the law ; on 
the contrary, He vindicated it, sometimes with great 
solemnity : " I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." 
In these words lies the secret of His action. Jesus 
loved to present His gospel as the realization of 
the ancient promises, the crown of earlier revelation. 
So that His disciples, in devoting themselves unre- 
servedly to His person and becoming His messengers, 
did not in any way feel that they were seceding from 
the chosen people. On the contrary, they held them- 
selves to belong to Israel now more truly than ever, 
and with a better claim than their fellow citizens 
(Acts iii. 23). 

But, on the other hand, the revolution not as yet 
effected in their minds was nevertheless accomplished 
as an objective fact. Calvary made an irrevocable 
breach between the religion of the past and of the 
future. Jesus, in dying, guaranteed His work against 
any unintelligent or timid reaction. From the outset 
He planted His cross between Christianity and 
Judaism ; and so often as His disciples are tempted 
to retrace their steps, they find it placed as an impas- 
sable barrier between them and their nation. 

The cross, in fact, was the real motive principle of 

3 



34 THE APOSTLE PAlTL. 



all the progress which ensued ; it was this which gave 
impulse and impetus to the primitive Church, and 
drove it irresistibly beyond the limits of Judaism. 
In spite of all their attempts at conciliation, the cross 
was destined to bring the apostles into conflicts, ever 
renewed, with the Jewish nation (Acts v. 28). Mean- 
while it weighed upon their secret thoughts and 
wrought on them like an inward goad. They have 
to justify the cross by the declarations of the pro- 
phets, to discover the purpose of God in this in- 
famous punishment ; in short, to prove its necessity 
as an essential factor in the plan of salvation pre- 
pared by God for mankind (Acts iii. 17, 18 ; viii. 31, 
etc.). The terminus of this movement of thought is 
found in the theory of redemption formulated by the 
apostle Paul. Thus the external development of the 
Church and the internal progress of the apostolic 
doctrine equally proceeded from the cross of Jesus. 
The apostles, to be sure, did not foresee all these 
consequences. The principle of their faith and their 
loyalty to their crucified Master were about to lead 
them whither they would not. For a little while the 
bark which bears them remains in harbour ; but the 
last cords are already severed, the anchor is lifted, 
and from that moment every impulse, every motion of 
the waves serves to carry it farther from the ancient 
shore of Judaism, to which it will never more return. _ 

That which seems to us, more than anything else, 
to characterize the narrative of the Acts is this same 
latent dualism, this tranquil co-existence of Judaism 
and Christianity in the primitive Christian life and 
creed. The union is sincere, because it is complete. 
It is, in fact, in this very simplicity of hope and this 



THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. 35 

very behaviour that the striking originality of the pic- 
ture of early Christianity consists. There is no trace 
of any compromise between hostile tendencies ; the 
two streams are intermingled, and blend in perfect 
harmony. No one feels it necessary to renounce 
Moses in order to remain faithful to Jesus. There 
is actually so little contradiction between the old and 
new faith, that in some cases conversion to the Gospel 
awakened a new zeal for Judaism. 

We find the early Christians observing the national 
feasts and holidays (Acts ii. 1 ; xviii. 21 [?] ; xx. 6, 16 ; 
Rom. xiv. 5). They take part in the worship of the 
temple and the synagogue ; they pray at the cus- 
tomary hours (chaps, ii. 46 ; iii. 1 ; v. 42 ; x. 9). They 
observe the fasts, and undergo voluntary abstinence, 
binding themselves by special vows like all pious 
Jews (xiii. 2; xviii. 18 ; xxi. 23). They scrupulously 
avoid unlawful food, and all legal defilement (x. 14). 
They have their children circumcised (xv. 5 ; xvi. 3 ; 
Gal. v. 2). In short, they are like the pious Ananias 
in the eyes of the Jews at Damascus [dvrjp evXafirjs 1 
Kara rov vo/jlov (Acts xxii. 12). This scrupulous piety 
won for them the esteem and admiration of the 
people (chap. v. 13). 1 

The primitive Christians were Jewish alike in their 
ideas and their hopes. Their creed was still com- 
prised in a single dogma : Jesus is the Messiah. This 
simple proposition, as M. Reuss well observes, was 
not new in respect to its attribute, but only as regards 
its subject. 3 Their preaching of the Gospel strictly 



1 See Reuss, Histoirc de la thdologie chrdtienne au siecle 
apostolique^ vol. i., p. 282, 3rd edition. [Eng. trans., i , 249.] 
8 Reuss, Histoire^ etc. vol. i., p. 284. [Eng. trans., i., 251.] 



36 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

followed the lines of Messianic tradition (i. 7 ; ii. 36 ; 
iif. 20). They awaited, with almost feverish expecta- 
tion, the approaching advent of their Master, and 
pictured his return in colours and images wholly 
borrowed from Pharisaism. 

But in reality, all this formed only the outside of 
their life and creed. The conception of the Messiah, 
when applied to the historical person of Jesus, could 
not fail to undergo a transformation. The kingdom 
of God, which the apostles invited their fellow 
citizens to enter, was from the first divested of its 
political and terrestrial character ; it must be entered 
by repentance and the remission of sins ; and the 
Saviour of the nation becomes thus, in the nature of 
the case, the Saviour of the individual. Herein lies 
the profound significance of the miracle of Pentecost. 
That day was the birthday of the Church, not because 
of the marvellous success of Peter's preaching, but 
because the Christian principle, hitherto only existing 
objectively and externally in the person of Jesus, 
passed from that moment into the souls of His 
disciples and there attained its inward realization. 
On the day of Pentecost memory became faith. 1 

And thus in the very midst of Judaism we see 
created and unfolded a form of religious life essen- 
tially different from it — the Christian life. A new 
flower blooms on the old stem. In the midst of the 
national family, the first Christians felt themselves 
brethren in a peculiar sense ; side by side with the 
temple ritual, we find the more intimate and 



1 Sec Neandei's History of the Planting and Training of 
the Christian Church; Dc Pressense's Early Years of Chris- 
tianity. 



THE PRIMITIVE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY. 37 

spiritual worship of the " upper room." Exhortation 
and prayer, baptism in the name of Jesus, the 
breaking of bread in commemoration of His death, 
charity to the poor — here are present already all the 
essential elements of Christian worship. , 

At the same time, by the natural effect of discus- 
sion, the apostles gained a clearer understanding of 
the new principle which animated them. Their faith, 
which at first was nothing more than a powerful 
sentiment binding them to Jesus, sought day by day 
to attain a more just and exact definition of its 
object. Peter at first simply designates Jesus as a 
man approved of God (ii. 22) ; then, as the Holy and 
Righteous One; as the Prince and Leader of life 
(hi. 14, 15). At last the new faith is revealed in its 
full import in the courageous declaration of the 
apostle: "Jesus is the stone which you builders 
despised, and which has become the headstone of the 
corner. In none other is there salvation : for there 
has not been given to men any other name under 
heaven by which they can be saved" (iv. 11, 12). 
To the claim of Judaism to be the sole religion is 
here opposed the equal claim of the Gospel. Conflict 
was inevitable. 

On both sides, it is true, there seem to have been 
efforts made to prevent it. The Jewish authorities, 
alarmed by their too easy triumph over Jesus, hesi- 
tated to attack His disciples. They wished to have 
no more to do with them ; they warned, and even 
implored them. They could not make up their minds 
to repress them by violence, and yielded readily to 
the wise counsel of Gamaliel. The apostles, on their 
side, seemed equally unwilling to precipitate matters. 
In their naive expectation of soon seeing their whole 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



nation converted, they avoided giving it offence. 
If they recall the murder of Jesus, they hasten to 
excuse it, on the ground of the ignorance of the per- 
petrators and its Divine necessity (iii. 13-19). 

But the logic of principles and events was to prove 
too strong for this goodwill. The heads of the 
nation contented themselves at first with forbidding 
the apostles to speak in the name of Jesus. Un- 
fortunately, this was the one point on which it was 
impossible for them to obey. The prohibition led to 
transgression ; and the transgression in its turn in- 
evitably provoked violence. These first persecutions 
stimulated the zeal and enthusiasm of the disciples, 
and braced them for the struggle (iv. 24 ; v. 41). "It 
is better to obey God than man." In this phrase 
we hear by anticipation the farewell of the apostles to 
national Judaism. 

So, little by little, Christianity and Judaism came 
to exhibit the hostility latent in their principles. Let 
a man now arise bold enough to disentangle the two 
systems and set them in antithesis, and we shall see 
the great conflict begun by the discourses and the 
death of Jesus break forth again as fiercely as before. 
Such a man was Stephen, deacon and martyr. 



CHAPTER II. 

STEPHEN THE PRECURSOR OF PAUL.— COLLISION 
BETWEEN THE JEWISH AND THE CHRISTIAN 
PRINCIPLE (Acts vi., vii.). 

THE first verses of the sixth chapter of the Acts 
indicate a great change in the internal con- 
dition of the primitive Church. At the same time, we 
find ourselves apparently on firmer historical ground. 
The early days of pure enthusiasm are succeeded by 
a period of bitter divisions within, and fierce conflicts 
without. 

The growth of the Church destroyed its internal 
harmony. Opposing tendencies were aroused and 
displayed themselves in its midst. "In those days, 
when the number of the disciples was increasing, 
there arose a loud murmuring of the Hellenists 
against the Hebrews, because their widows were 
neglected in the distribution of relief" (vi. i). Is not 
this an undeniable proof that the Judaic spirit, with 
its prejudice and intolerance, survived in the Chris- 
tian community? and may we not foresee already 
something of the more ardent and serious struggles to 
which this spirit was afterwards to give rise? This 
dissension was appeased, however, by a triumph of the 
primitive spirit of charity. The seven deacons who 
were appointed all bear Greek names. Probably they 
were selected, by preference, from the aggrieved party 3 

39 



40 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

in order to prevent further complaints. Among these 
deacons, Stephen was designated first, being a man 
full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and of favour and 
influence among the people. He had apprehended 
the spiritual character of the Gospel better than the 
apostles themselves, and surrendered himself with 
absolute faith to the new principle. 1 

He soon found himself in the forefront of the 
struggle that was beginning against Judaism, carried 
onwards by the boldness of his views quite as much 
as by his zeal. To this struggle his intervention gave 
a new turn. The apostles had remained on the 
defensive in their preaching of Jesus ; Stephen broke 
through this reserve, and boldly assumed the offensive. 
In his public discussions he laid bare the materialistic 
principle of Pharisaic piety ; he pointed out with 
unsparing plainness the secret cause of that invincible 
obstinacy with which the Jews had always resisted 



1 We consider that it was in this faith and holy inspiration — 
that is, in a clearer comprehension of the gospel of Jesus — rather 
than in his Hellenism, that the loftiness, courage, and spiritua- 
lity of Stephen's thought had their source. We believe, contrary 
to the received opinion, that it is attributing undeserved honour 
to the Hellenist Jews to regard them as a spiritual and liberally 
minded party. They were treated somewhat with contempt, 
because their origin appeared less pure ; but it is probable, as 
in all analogous cases, that they cherished on this account a 
more bigoted temper and a sterner zeal, in order to atone for 
their foreign taint and efface the recollection of it. They attached 
themselves to the Pharisaic party much more than to that of 
the Sadducees. It was the Hellenists, indeed, who accused and 
stoned Stephen. Saul was a Hellenist. It was Hellenist Jews, 
again, who wished to kill Paul after his conversion (ix. 29). 
And finally, the men who, on recognising Paul in the temple, 
denounced and sought to slay him were Jews from Asia (xxi. 27). 



STEPHEN THE PRECURSOR OF PAUL. 41 

the word of God. His denunciations of their religious 
formalism recalled sometimes those accents of the 
Master which used to excite the Pharisees to fury. 
This fury again awoke. The capital charge brought 
against Jesus was renewed against Stephen ; false 
witnesses again repeated the accusation, " We have 
heard this man speak against the holy place and 
against the law. We have heard him say that this 
Jesus of Nazareth will destroy the temple, and change 
the customs that Moses gave us " (vi. 13, 14). 

How far was this charge true or false? What 
was the real idea of Stephen ? We can only learn 
it through his discourse. This speech is divided into 
two parts, of very unequal length — one historical, and 
the other personal. The fifty-first verse forms the 
somewhat abrupt transition from the one to the other. 
At first sight, one does not readily perceive the con- 
nexion between this long defence and the accusation ; 
and some interpreters, misled by this, have concluded 
that we have not here Stephen's actual discourse, but 
a free historical composition which the author of the 
Acts has substituted for it. That is only a superficial 
judgment. When we study the address more closely 
and grasp its main idea, we find it impossible to 
imagine anything which could have met the accu- 
sation more directly or gone more thoroughly to the 
root of the matter, or any defence, on the whole, more 
apt and eloquent. 

What, then, is its pervading thought? This de- 
clares itself in that same fifty-first verse which marks 
the transition from the first to the second part of the 
address. " You stiff-necked men," cries Stephen, " un- 
circumcised in heart and ears, will you always resist 
the Holy Ghost ? " This vehement apostrophe, with 



42 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

which his long historical statement concludes, com- 
pletely sums it up. Stephen, in- fact, endeavours in 
traversing the course of Israel's history to point out 
and illustrate the perpetual conflict that existed be- 
tween the unfailing mercy of God and the stubborn, 
carnal obstinacy of the people. This tragic antithesis 
is the one subject of his discourse. He seems, at the 
first glance, to forget the accusation laid against him ; 
but in reality he does not lose sight of it for a moment. 
It is the constant goal to which every word is directed. 
In rehearsing the conflicts of the past he is well 
aware, and makes it very evident, that he is depicting 
by anticipation the struggle in which at the present 
moment he is himself involved. Besides, Stephen 
had no other means of making himself listened to and 
understood. To the High Priest's question, Is it true 
what these men say ? he could not answer directly 
either Yes or No. He could not answer in the affir- 
mative ; for in his eyes the Gospel was not the de- 
struction of the law and prophets, but their fulfilment. 
To answer] No, would have been to deny his cause, 
and to save himself by means of an equivocation. He 
must explain, in order to defend himself; and what 
better explanation can he offer, than to make his case 
parallel with that of Moses and the prophets ? On a 
similar occasion, Jesus had made much the same reply. 
Stephen's discourse is the complement and develop- 
ment of the parable of the Vineyard. The orator was 
obliged to throw his speech into this historical form. 
By doing so he gave the rage of his opponents time 
to subside, and meanwhile secured the means of 
showing clearly the true cause of their hatred. The 
great epochs in the history of the Jewish people fur- 
nish the main divisions of his discourse. 



STEPHEN THE PRECURSOR OE PACE 43 

The first extends from Abraham to Moses (vii. 
2-19). The nation does not exist as yet ; but before 
its birth it was the object of Divine favour ; for to it, 
in truth, the promises given to the patriarchs were 
made (vers. 4, 5, 7). 

The second epoch lies between Moses and David. 
In referring to the first period, the orator has extolled 
the goodness of God ; in describing the second, he 
endeavours to depict with equal force the ingratitude 
and carnal disposition of the people. This period 
becomes typical. In Moses the deliverer (\vrpcoT7js), 
Stephen enables us to recognise the image of a far 
greater Deliverer. His unworthy reception, the oppo- 
sition he met with and the incredulity with which his 
word was received, are set forth in such terms that 
the history of Moses, by an easy transition, becomes 
the history of Jesus acted out beforehand (ver. 35). 

The third period comprises the times of David and 
Solomon. Stephen breaks off at the building of the 
temple. He does not, as some have thought, censure 
the very idea of such an undertaking ; on the con- 
trary, he sees in it a distinct fulfilment of. God's 
original promise made to Abraham : " They shall 
worship Me in this place " (ver. 7). 

He saw fit to confine his historical exposition be- 
tween these two events — the prophecy, and its fulfil- 
ment. In vain the nation displayed its ingratitude. 
God remained faithful, and the temple was built. But 
alas ! this blessing produced no better result than 
the rest. The carnal disposition of the people spoilt 
it, and turned it into a cause of destruction. The 
very temple where God should have been worshipped 
in spirit and in truth, became the centre and support 
of a bigoted and hypocritical piety. Instead of reveal- 



44 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

ing to all mankind the one universal God, who made 
heaven and earth, it only served to limit and conceal 
the majesty of Jehovah. This, we take it, is the true 
interpretation of the passage, the most important in 
the whole discourse, in which Stephen shows what he 
really thought about the temple : "David found favour 
before God, and asked that he might build a taber- 
nacle for the God of Jacob; and Solomon built Him 
a house. But the Most High dwells not in houses 
made by human hands, according to the prophet's 
word : Heaven is My throne, earth the footstool of 
My feet ; what house will you build Me ? saith the 
Lord ; or what should be the place of My rest? Is 
it not My hand that has made all these things ? " 
(vers. 46-50.) 

Thus had Stephen advanced slowly, but always in 
a straight line, to meet the charge laid against him. 
He now confronts and grapples with it directly and 
without hesitation. His answer is deduced from this 
prolonged narrative with overwhelming effect. It is 
an old contention, this in which he is engaged — 
the contention between God and His people. Is it 
surprising that the people to-day show no more 
intelligence, no better disposition than they had done 
with regard to Moses, or the prophets, or Jesus ? 
" Which of the prophets did not your fathers perse- 
cute? They killed those who foretold of the coming 
of the Righteous One ; and when this Righteous One 
appeared, you became His betrayers and murderers ! 
You possessed the law, . . . and you did not keep it." 
In other words, You are just like your fathers : 
o)S oi Trarepes vfiwv /cal v^iels (vers. 51-53). At this 
point the position appears to be changed : the accused 
has become judge of his accusers. But at the same 



STEPHEN THE PRECURSOR OF PAUL. 45 



time he has anticipated, in his reading of the history 
of the past, the fate which awaits himself and the 
sentence about to fall upon him. 

Stephen, in truth, did not for one moment deceive 
himself. He knew his adversaries well. He has no 
hope of either convincing or softening them. This 
sense of the inevitable is manifest from the first. He 
does not merely point out a few passing errors or 
accidental failings ; his object was to denounce a 
congenital vice, inherent in the very character of his 
people and persisting through their entire history, — 
a carnal disposition, insensible alike to chastisement 
and grace, and which had borne the same fruit in 
every age. Its present obstinacy, therefore, was no 
matter for surprise. Such a people could not deny 
its nature. This was a radical condemnation of 
Judaism, such as the Pharisees had not heard since 
the days of Jesus. Stephen only discloses this view 
by degrees. At first, he keeps it back and holds his 
audience in suspense ; but as he goes on, his purpose 
grows clearer, and at each new stage of the history he 
expresses himself more pointedly and plainly. His 
hearers begin to murmur and grow excited ; Stephen 
in slow and unrelenting tones unfolds before them 
this humiliating history, in which all the time they 
could recognise their own likeness. When at last he 
has finished, and when, as he perceives, caution could 
no longer serve him, he launches forth his whole 
meaning in the apostrophe, "Ye stiff-necked and 
uncircumcised," etc. Then the rage of his adversaries 
bursts out in turn, and gnashing their teeth they 
rush upon him. But they interrupted him too late. 
Stephen has spoken. He yields himself to their fury ; 
and his martyrdom completes his discourse. 



46 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Stephen's heroic death has diverted attention from 
the depth and force which characterize his mind. He 
left Peter and the heroes of Pentecost far behind him. 
He compelled Judaism and Christianity to assume 
a sharper definition, to affirm their several principles 
more clearly, and to separate. The negation of 
Jewish privileges, the right of all men to share in the 
kingdom of God, the universal and spiritual character 
of Christianity, are the more immediate deductions 
following from his discourse. The drama in which he 
perished seems to have been the sequel and repetition 
of that which cost the Saviour's life. Pie continued 
the work of Jesus, and prepared the way for that of 
the apostle of the Gentiles. Paul must have heard 
his address, and in after days would often call it to 
mind, when experiencing painfully in his turn the 
invincible unbelief of his people. What has he done 
more in the ninth and tenth chapters of his epistle to 
the Romans than formulate dogmatically that decree 
of reprobation, which we find in Stephen's discourse 
set forth under the garb of history ? 



CHAPTER III. 

Paul's conversion. — triumph of the christian 

OVER THE JEWISH PRINCIPLE (Acts IX. 4-22). 

IT was in the breast of Saul that the violent conflict 
raised by Stephen was decided, issuing in the 
triumph of the Christian principle. But the signifi- 
cance of his conversion can only be understood when 
his Pharisaism has first been clearly defined. 

I. Saul's Antecedents. 

Saul was a Hellenistic Jew, born at Tarsus in 
Cilicia. The fact that he was born at this brilliant 
centre of Greek civilization has often been made too 
much of. The influence of Greece upon the develop- 
ment of his mind seems to have amounted to nothing. 
The two or three quotations from Greek poets to be 
found in his epistles and discourses (Acts xvii. 28 ; 
1 Cor. xv. 33 ; Tit. i. 12) are lines which had become 
proverbial, and which Paul may frequently have 
heard quoted in pagan society. There is a notable 
resemblance between his style of writing and that of 
Thucydides ; but it only proves the natural affinity of 
their genius. Paul did not learn his dialectics in the 
schools of the sophists or rhetoricians ; it has much 
more in common with that of the Talmud and the 



4 8 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



rabbis than of Plato or Aristotle. Though he wrote 
in Greek, he thought in Aramaic ; he seems to have 
borrowed from Greece nothing but his vocabulary. 
Out of these external elements he has created a 
language of his own, vehement and original like 
his genius. As for the universalism of his Christian 
belief, that was due to anything rather than his 
Hellenistic origin. As we shall see afterwards, it is 
not the citizen of Tarsus, but the Pharisee of Jeru- 
salem that accounts for the apostle of the Gentiles. 

Paul himself has been careful in his epistles to demon- 
strate the purity of his Hebrew descent, and the strict- 
ness of his Judaism. Note the significant gradation he 
makes out in Philippians iii. 4-6, when enumerating 
his advantages according to the flesh : Circumcised 
the eighth day, he belongs to the family of Abraham ; 
in this family, he belongs specifically to the race of 
Israel ; within this race, he has sprung from the tribe 
of Benjamin — that is, from the tribe which united 
with Judah after the separation to form the kingdom 
in which the great religious traditions of the Old 
Testament were maintained in their purity and 
vigour. Finally, among the descendants of these two 
Jewish tribes, he belonged to the sect of the Pharisees, 
the strictest and most loyal of Jews ; and in its 
midst he was further distinguished by his remark- 
able proficiency, and his persecuting zeal (Gal. i. 13). 

We have every reason to suppose that, though he 
was born at Tarsus, Paul was from tender infancy 
brought up at Jerusalem, where he had a married 
sister (Acts xxiii. 16). So we may conclude from a 
passage in Acts xxii. 3, which we translate as follows : 
" I am a Jew, born at Tarsus in Cilicia, but nourished 
and brought up in this city, at the feet of Gamaliel, 



PAULS CONVERSION. 49 



and carefully instructed in the law of my fathers." 1 
His parents, intending him to be a rabbi, had no 
doubt placed him at the school of the illustrious 
Pharisaic doctor, who is still counted among the 
highest authorities of the Mishna. There Saul re- 
ceived the scholastic training of a rabbi, and exercised 
himself for years in the subtle dialectics and the in- 
genious and refined hermeneutics which characterized 
the rabbinical teaching. This mode of teaching and 
discussion had already been determined and formu- 
lated by Hillel ; and we know what marked traces it 
has left on Paul's great epistles.' 2 

It is, however, the substance rather than the form of 
Paul's rabbinical teaching which 'we are most con- 
cerned to understand. Paul, on becoming a Christian, 

1 In this passage the words lv ry ttoXci Tavrrj must mean 
Jerusalem, and not Tarsus. Paul was not only instructed, 
7r€7rai8eu/x€Vo9, but nourished and brought up from earliest child- 
hood at Jerusalem, uj'areflpa/x/xeVo?. This disposes of all the 
conjectures that have been made about Paul's Greek education. 

- On Hillel and Gamaliel, see Derenbourg: Essai snr Vhis- 
toire et la geographie de la Palestine cVaprh le Talmud, pp. 
178, 187, and 239. Hillel, of whose family, along with the 
traditions of his school, Gamaliel was the heir, seems to have 
been, so far as we can judge, the Aristotle of rabbinical theology. 
He classified and formulated the different rules of its scholastic 
reasoning. Here is an example of his mode of discussion, 
quoted by M. Derenbourg. The point in question was whether, 
if the 15th Nisan, the Passover, fell on a Saturday, it was 
lawful to sacrifice the Paschal lamb on that day. Hillel 
answered in the affirmative, and established his assertion by 
three reasons : (1) by an argument drawn from analogy. The 
law of the Sabbath does not prevent the daily sacrifice ; there is 
no more reason why the Paschal sacrifice should be forbidden. 
— (2) By an argument a fortiori. If the daily sacrifice was 
offered notwithstanding the Sabbath, when its omission was 

4 



co THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

did not abandon all his former convictions ; for had 
not many of his Christian ideas their roots in his 
early faith ? What else, in fact, is his entire system 
of doctrine but Pharisaism transformed and inverted ? 
Unfortunately, we have only very vague and im- 
perfect information about the doctrines taught in the 
Pharisaic schools of the period. Nevertheless, it is 
certain that the apostle's theology owed to Judaism 
the general basis on which it rests. There is no need 
of appealing to external documents of doubtful 
authority, in order to discover the exact nature of 
this basis. It will be enough to note in his epistles 
the general ideas which had their origin in Judaism. 
We shall thus be able to trace the traditional mould 
in which Paul's system of thought was cast from the 
beginning. His theology continued to be Jewish to 
a much greater extent than has been commonly 
• supposed. 

From the Old Testament Paul drew the primary 
and fundamental ideas of his system : the ideas of 
God, of revelation, of righteousness, and of holiness. 
He is essentially Jewish, in what one might call his 
mental categories, and in the general point of view 

not punishable by extermination, how much more should the 
Passover be, seeing extermination was the punishment for its 
omission. — (3) By an exegetical argument. It is ordained that 
the act should be fulfilled at its appointed time ; if that means 
in spite of the sabbath in the case of the daily sacrifice, it must 
have the same meaning respecting the Passover. Is not this 
the very logic used by Paul in his discussions? Comp. 1 Cor. 
ix. S-10 ; Gal. iii. 15 ; 2 Cor. iii. 7 ; Rom. v. 12. Beside these 
three kinds of argument there were four others, not less e^ictly 
denned. There was evidently a complete organum taught in 
these schools and there acquired by Paul, who mastered and 
wielded it with wonderful effect. 



PAUL'S CONVERSION. 5r 

from which he considers the relation of God to the 
world. The God of Paul is the God of the old cove- 
nant ; He is the God of Abraham, of Jacob, of Moses 
and the prophets ; He is the One, the jealous God, 
the absolute Creator of the universe, who manifests in 
His works the signs of His divinity ; He is the one 
God, living and true (i Cor. viii. 4-6 ; x. 26 ; Rom. i. 
20, 23 ; 1 Thess. i. 9 ; 1 Tim. vi. 15, 16). This God 
was the God of Israel in a peculiar sense, because He 
had entered into a special covenant with them, and 
had given them the oracles and promises in trust 
(Rom. iii. 2 ; ix. 4, 5). On this account, the Old 
Testament still possesses the authority of a Divine 
revelation (1 Cor. xv. 4 ; Gal. iii. 8) ; it is the revela- 
tion of the holy God, with whom we can have no 
peace without perfect purity of heart. Hence Paul's 
lofty conception, at once moral and religious, of 
Bi/cacoavvr], and the correlative idea of sin ; whose 
tragic conflict in the apostle's soul was the starting 
point of his whole spiritual development. 

Paul regards the pagan world as did the Pharisees 
of his da)-. Paganism is the kingdom of darkness 
(2 Cor. vi. 14). The heathen know not God ; they 
adore the creature instead of the Creator (1 Thess. 
iv. 5 ; Gal. iv. 8). They were at once clttigtoi and 
avofjLOL (2 Cor. vi. 14 ; Rom. i. 24-26 ; 1 Cor. vi. 6). 
And lastly, as opposed to the Jews, they are essen- 
tially d/jLapTcoXoi (Gal. ii. 15). 

It was to Pharisaism, again, that Paul was indebted 
for his notions respecting angels and demons. 
Ranged in different orders, the angels surround 
God's throne (Col. i. 16 ; Rom. viii. 38). They take 
part in the government of the world, and will accom- 
pany Christ at His coming (1 Thess. iv. 16). The 



52 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

idea of the intervention of angels at the giving of 
the law on Mount Sinai, SiarayeU oY ayyeXcov 
(Gal. iii. 19), 1 belongs likewise to the Judaism of that 
day. To the host of angels is opposed that of the 
demons, with Satan at their head. It was he who 
long ago tempted Eve, under the form of a serpent 
(2 Cor. xi. 3). Since then he has never ceased his 
endeavours to beguile men into sin (1 Thess. iii. 5 ; 

1 Cor. vii. 5), or to torture them by the infliction of 
physical pain (1 Cor. v. 5 ; 2 Cor. xii. 7). His proper 
domain is heathenism ; and he is the real object of 
the worship of idolaters. He is the god of the present 
age, as opposed to Christ, the King of the age to come 
(2 Cor. iv. 4). 

For Paul, in fact, as for the Pharisees, the history 
of humanity had two great divisions : the existing, 
and the future age (Eph. i. 21). The latter is to be 
inaugurated by the glorious return of Christ, of which 
the apostle has the same conception as the other 
disciples of Jesus (1 Cor. vii. 29 ; 1 Thess. iv. 16; v. 2; 

2 Thess. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52). The first period was 
one of sin, suffering, and death ; the second will be 
one of holiness and life. Adam is the head of the 
old humanity ; the Messiah is the head of the new. 

We know, further, that the doctrine of Predes- 
tination, whose roots are found in the prophetic 
teaching of the Old Testament, had been developed 
and formulated in the Pharisaic schools. Here, no 
doubt, lay the origin of the Pauline predestination. 
The doctrine of the resurrection and of the last 
judgment are derived from the same source. " The 



1 Comp. Acts vii. 53 ; Josephus, A?it. xv. 5, 3 ; and Deut. 
xxxiii. 2, according to the LXX, 



PAULS CONVERSION. 



Pharisees," Josephus tells us, " think that everything 
which happens has been decreed beforehand by 
destiny. They do not on that account deny the 
agency of the human will ; for it has pleased God 
that the decrees of destiny and man's free will should 
coincide, whether in respect of the practice of virtue 
or of vice. They believe that souls possess an im- 
mortal energy, and that beneath the earth are rewards 
and punishments for those who in this life have lived 
virtuously or otherwise ; that the souls of the latter 
shall be imprisoned there for ever, while the rest shall 
speedily be restored to life." l 

In the last place, is it not to the rabbinical theology 
that Paul is indebted for his anthropological views ? 
He did not invent his division of human nature 
into <Tdp%, ^v^r}, irvev^a ; for it can be traced back 
to the very phraseology of the Old Testament. The 
idea of original sin hereditary in Adam's race seems 
likewise to have been formulated by Pharisaism. It 
was evidently a complete body of doctrine, coherent 
and systematic, that Paul learned at the feet of 
Gamaliel. This system he has greatly modified ; but 
for all that, one can easily discern that the new edifice 
contains much of the material of the old, and follows 
the main lines of its construction. The mental bio- 
graphy of Paul which we propose to relate is simply 
the progressive transformation, under the influence 
of the Christian principle, of that Pharisaic theology 
which formed the object of his original faith. 

The soul of Saul's Pharisaic creed was the hope of 
the Messiah (2 Cor. v. 16), a hope which fired both 

1 We quote this passage as it has been restored and trans- 
lated by Derenbourg, op. ciL, p. 123. 



54 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

heart and imagination. His convictions were his 
life ; he surrendered himself to them unreservedly. But 
this ardent piety, these holy ambitions and deep crav- 
ings, and the absolute logic which Paul brought into 
his Pharisaism, supplied the very force which was des- 
tined, in driving him forwards, to carry him beyond it. 
Let us observe here that dominant feature of Paul's 
character which enables us to comprehend, if not to 
account for, the great change that took place in him. 
We refer to his passion for the absolute. Paul's 
was, in fact, a mind simple and complete — all of a 
piece — one that must above everything be logical. 
He sees in a principle all the consequences that it 
involves ; and detects the principle in each of its 
manifold consequences. It was of no use to speak to 
him of degrees of truth, of accommodations or com- 
promises ; he marches by way of a radical negation 
to an absolute affirmative. His intellectual tempera- 
ment was naturally intolerant. To him truth and 
error, so far from being matters of degree, stand like 
good and evil in radical contradiction. It is not 
surprising, therefore, that a mind of this cast failed to 
acquire the breadth of view and moderation of temper 
which distinguished his master Gamaliel. He has 
himself described what he must have been at this 
period of his life: "You know my past life in Judaism ; 
I excelled in zeal most of my companions in age, 
showing myself specially zealous for the traditions of 
my fathers " (Gal. i. 13). The teaching of the rabbis, 
the prophetic sayings of the Old Testament, the 
theocratic dreams of his contemporaries — he received 
them all with eagerness and emphasis ; he systema- 
tized and formulated them into a complete, coherent 
whole. It was altogether an ideal world that this 



PAUL'S CONVERSION. 55 

Pharisee contemplated within his soul. But the more 
he clung to these hopes, the more he had to suffer 
from the existing state of things. How melancholy 
was the contrast between his radiant inward vision 
and the sorrowful state of his people around him ! 
And this contradiction had no possible solution, from 
the Pharisaic point of view. The future appeared 
even more threatening than the present. Does not 
this bitter consciousness, this incongruity endured 
with so much impatience, explain Saul's furious 
hatred against the new sect of Christians ? For its 
scandalous progress was hastening the inevitable 
destruction of Judaism. 

In another direction Saul encountered an equally 
hopeless contradiction. There was in this Pharisee 
something still more absolute than his intellect, 
— his conscience. In vain would he have sought to 
satisfy it with a partial righteousness ; it demanded 
nothing less than perfect holiness. This ideal of holi- 
ness was set up in the written law ; and with this law 
his conscience entered into an incessant and unequal 
struggle, in which it was always and inevitably worsted. 
Every fresh effort resulted, of necessity, in a more 
humiliating defeat. He has himself described this 
mournful struggle in the seventh chapter of the 
epistle to the Romans. "It was through the law that 
I knew sin, for I had not known coveting, except the 
law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking 
occasion from the commandment, wrought in me all 
manner of coveting ; for without the law sin is dead. 
Once on a time, without the law, I was indeed alive ; 
but when the commandment came, sin recovered life, 
and I died ; and the commandment which had been 
given me to bring life, proved a cause of death" 



56 THE APOSTLE --PAUL. 

(Rom. vii. 7-12). Thus Paul found the very power 
in which he trusted for salvation rise against him and 
overwhelm him. The situation was without escape ; 
it could end only in despair (Rom. vii. 24). 

It was doubtless in the midst of these experiences 
that Paul encountered Stephen. With our know- 
ledge of his temperament, we may safely assume that 
he was one of those Jews from Asia and Cilicia who 
maintained the cause of the temple and the law 
against the disciple of Jesus (Acts vi. 9). The temp- 
tation of breaking a theological lance with Stephen was 
one he could not resist ; he listened to his discourses, 
and was present at his death. Stephen's arguments 
and his serene faith could not fail to touch him, 
and to awaken reflection. Perhaps it was then that 
he felt in his conscience for the first time the goad 
of Jesus (Acts xxvi. 14). It was not from this cause, 
however, that he became a Christian. Not only is 
it the case that Paul never refers his conversion to 
Stephen ; he forbids, most explicitly, any such ex- 
planation by his solemn declaration that he was not 
taught by any man, and does not hold his gospel in 
charge from any man. 

Between the death of Stephen and Paul's first 
preaching of Christianity at Damascus, there took 
place in his life that mysterious event to which he 
attributes his conversion and apostleship, and of which 
we must now ascertain the true character. 

II. The Appearance of Jesus to Paul. 
The Acts of the Apostles contains three accounts 
of this event — one given directly by Luke (ix. 1-22), 
the other two taken from the lips of Paul (xxv. 1-21 ; 
xxvi. 9-20). 



PAUL'S CONVERSION. 57 

There are some variations in the three narratives. 
According to the account in the ninth chapter, Paul's 
companions heard the voice which spoke to him ; 
according to that in the twenty-second, they did not. 
The ninth chapter states that they saw no one ; the 
two others, that they saw at any rate a dazzling light. 
In the first account, they remain standing ; in the 
third, they fall to the ground. And, lastly, the words 
which Jesus is said to have spoken to Paul, vary in all 
three reports. What the Saviour said to him, accord- 
ing to chap. xxvi. 1 6, is in the twenty-second chapter 
put in the mouth of Ananias (ver. 14). 

How did these differences arise ? Schleiermacher's 
school tried, for some time, to account for them by 
the variety of sources from which the author drew his 
narrative ; but even a superficial comparison of the 
three recitals shows clearly that they were drawn up 
by the same hand, and had one and the same origin. 
There is therefore no occasion to inquire, as has some- 
times been done, which is the most accurate. 

Could these differences have had a dogmatic reason? 
Did they serve to express in each instance some 
special aim pursued by the author ? So thought 
Baur. In the first account, he says, the historian, 
narrating the event from an objective point of view, 
lays stress upon the external circumstances of the 
event in order to prove its absolute reality. The 
two other accounts, put in the mouth of Paul, are 
from a more subjective point of view. 1 But of what 
value is this distinction ? Was Paul, when speaking 
before the Jews at Jerusalem, or before Agrippa, less 
concerned than Luke to prove the substantial reality 

1 Baur, Paulus, 2nd ed., pp. 72, 73. [Eng. trans., i., 65, 66.] 



5S THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

of this fact ? Were this explanation as legitimate as 
it is arbitrary, it would still in reality explain nothing. 
The first account, it is said, dwelling. on the objective 
reality of the miracle, makes out that Paul's com- 
panions heard the heavenly voice. But why did not 
Luke add that they saw the light, as appears in the 
second account? and that instead of standing they 
fell to the ground, as in the third ? Are not these 
two latter circumstances as appropriate as the first 
to prove the external reality of the vision ? or could 
it be said that they better accord with the subjective 
point of view of the later accounts, than with the 
objective standpoint of the first ? 

M. Zeller, unable to accept this explanation, offers 
us another. According to him, the author has been 
guided by a literary caprice, not by any dogmatic 
purpose. He is indifferent to historical accuracy 
and careless of self-contradiction ; his discrepancies 
are such as to show that pious imagination played 
a leading part in the composition of his narrative. 
But are we to admit that our author has modified his 
first account with the sole purpose of variety, or that 
in order to avoid monotony, he went to the length of 
contradicting himself? 

Can it be correct to assert, in the face of the con- 
trary evidence of his prologue, that the author of the 
Third Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles cared 
nothing for historical truth? Do we not find him 
scrupulously anxious about accuracy, always trying 
to trace things to their beginning, to get at the 
original witnesses, and to explain the facts in their 
true origin and connexion ? Supposing he is some- 
times in error, has he not succeeded in making 
certain parts of his work pass for' the journal of an 



PAUL'S CONVERSION. 59 

actual companion of the apostle Paul? Can we 
fairly accuse the man who wrote the last chapters 
of the Acts of indulging an arbitrary fancy ? 

These divergences are absolutely inexplicable on 
any hypothesis which assumes that the author was 
aware of them, and designed them to serve some 
doctrinal or literary purpose. It is obvious to any 
unprejudiced mind that they were undesigned \ and that 
they entirely escaped the writer's notice. They are 
discrepancies of precisely the sort that one always 
finds existing in the most faithful repetitions of the 
same narrative. Their explanation lies in their very 
triviality. They cannot in any way affect the reality 
of the event in question. They arise at certain ex- 
treme points belonging to the mere circumference of 
the narrative. They do not even belong to the cir- 
cumstances accompanying the miracle, but only to 
the subjective impressions made by them upon Paul's 
companions. On this point the record was liable to 
much more variation, as these impressions could not 
have been the same in all cases, nor described by all 
with the same exactitude. 

To draw from these discrepancies an argument 
against the historical character of the narrative seems 
to us a forced and arbitrary proceeding. If they 
were perfectly reconcilable, or even if they had never 
existed, those who will not admit the miracle would 
just as decisively reject the testimony of the Acts of 
the Apostles. As Zeller frankly acknowledges, their 
denial of the miraculous rests on a philosophical 
theory, the discussion of which lies outside the scope 
of historical research. 1 

1 Zeller, Die Apostclgeschichte, p. 197. [Eng. trans., i., 291.] 



60 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

For our part, we cannot set aside this triple record 
quite so easily. We find it repeated at the end of 
the book, in that fragment which in the judgment 
of the majority of critics is the authentic testimony 
of a friend of the apostle. This being so, it is natural 
to suppose that Luke's narrative was derived from 
the testimony of Paul himself; and it only remains 
to ascertain how far it is confirmed by the apostle's 
statements in his own epistles. 

It is a point of the utmost importance to observe 
that Paul knows absolutely nothing of any progressive 
stages or gradual process in his conversion to the 
Gospel. He looked back to it throughout his life as 
a sudden, overwhelming event, which surprised him 
in the full tide of his Judaic career and drove him, in 
spite of himself, into a new channel. He was van- 
quished and subdued by main force (Phil. iii. 12). 
He is a conquered rebel, whom God leads in triumph 
in face of the world (2 Cor. ii. 14). If he preaches 
the Gospel, he cannot make any boast of doing so ; 
he was compelled to preach it, under a higher necessity 
which he had no power to resist. There he stands, 
— a slave in chains! (1 Cor. ix. 15-18.) 

Independently of this general impression, Paul 
makes three express statements on the subject, which 
we must consider with close attention. 

The first of these passages, where Paul undoubtedly 
is referring to his conversion, is Galatians i. 12-17. 
He only describes it there as an inward experience. 
One day it pleased God, who had set him apart from 
his mother's womb, to reveal His Son in him, in order 
that he might go and preach Him to the heathen. 
Paul here refers his conversion and his apostleship 
to the same date, and the same cause. His one object 



FAUVS CONVERSION. 61 

being to set forth the Divine origin and absolute 
independence of his gospel, he contents himself with 
presenting the inner phase of his conversion {a-no- 
KaXvyjrat tov vlov avrov iv i/nol), and makes no 
reference to the special means employed by God to 
bring about in him this work of grace. Two remarks 
will show, however, that the idea of a miraculous and 
direct revelation from Christ is none the less involved 
in this passage. In the first place, while attributing 
his conversion to the grace of God as its prime cause, 
he at the same time gives as its proximate and 
effectual cause the personal intervention of Jesus. 
This comes out clearly in the first verse of the epistle, 
where the name of Jesus occurs even before the name 
of God ; and it is expressly signified in ver. 12, where 
Jesus Christ is spoken of, not as the object alone of 
Divine revelation, but even as its Author. 1 

Secondly, Paul regards his conversion as a sudden 
occurrence, an event sharply defined and associated 
with certain external circumstances of time and place. 
He observes, for instance, that it happened in the 
midst of the war he was carrying on against Chris- 
tianity, overtaking him while yet a busy and zealous 
persecutor. Furthermore, he remembers that it took 
place in the neighbourhood of Damascus (Gal. i. 17); 
and that, from this moment, his life followed an 
entirely different course. Thus in three essential 
points — the personal intervention of Jesus, and the 

1 At' aTTOKaXvij/euis 'Irjcrov XptcrTov. These two last words 
form what the grammarians call a subjective genitive. They 
indicate not the object, but the author, the subject of the revela- 
tion, as is proved by the words Trap av6pu>Trov, to which these 
are the antithesis. 



62 THE AFOSTLE PAUL. 



time and place at which it occurred — the story told us 
in the Acts is indirectly, but distinctly, confirmed. 

While in this passage of Galatians Paul only brings 
out the inner aspect of his conversion, we find him 
dwelling quite as exclusively on its exterior and 
objective nature in the two passages remaining for 
our consideration. The first is in I Corinthians ix. I : 
"Am I not an apostle ? Have I not seen the Lord 
Jesus ? " Paul here associates his apostolic call with 
the manifestation of the Risen One, shared by him 
with the other apostles ; he links them to each other 
as effect and cause. 

The objective reality of this manifestation is still 
more apparent in the second passage (i Cor. xv. 8), 
where Paul puts it on a level with that of which the 
Twelve were witnesses. " Lastly, and after all the 
others, Christ appeared to me also, as to an abortion." 
These last words (Joairepel rep eicrpoofiaTi) should be 
noted. Only one interpretation is possible : that already 
given by Grotius, and accepted by Baur. An e/crpcofia 
can only mean a foetus torn violently and prematurely 
from the maternal womb ; as Grotius has well ex- 
pressed it, hoc ideo dicit, quia non longa institutione ad 
Christianismum per ductus fuit, quo esset velut naturalis 
partus, sed vi subita, quomodo immaturi partus ejici 
solent. How could Paul indicate more pointedly than 
he does in this expression the objective nature of 
the force exerted over his mind at his conversion ? 

Whatever the fact may be, no critic will now deny 
that Paul maintained throughout his life that he had 
witnessed an external appearance of the risen Christ. 
Baur contends that the apostle spoke of the matter 
always with reserve, and with a kind of shame, as 
though he felt instinctively that he was standing on 



PAULS CONVERSION. 63 

somewhat unstable ground. But what ground is 
there for this assertion ? Are the two passages in 
the Corinthian epistle, in which the external side of 
the occurrence is specially emphasized, of less impor- 
tance than that in Galatians, which chiefly reveals its 
internal character ? If Paul bases the independence 
of his gospel on the inward revelation, does he not 
regard the external reality as the source and proof of 
his apostleship ? Does it seem as though he referred 
but timidly to this manifestation ? We are bold to 
affirm the contrary. If in his epistle to the Corin- 
thians, he makes no more than a passing reference 
to the event, it is because the Corinthians already 
knew about it. The apostle, in the first verses of 
the fifteenth chapter, is only summing up his pre- 
vious teaching ; and among the leading facts, which 
he dwelt on before everything else (iv Trpcorois'), he 
mentions in its turn this appearance to him of the 
risen Jesus. Does not this strongly suggest to us 
that he must have already related the great event in 
detail, and given an account at Corinth similar to 
the one we have in the book of the Acts ? 

Paul's testimony, therefore, is explicit and incon- 
trovertible. But though we may not mistake its 
import, is it not possible to diminish its weight ? 
The evidence, it is said, proves that Paul believed 
in the reality of the manifestation, — nothing more. 
How shall we educe the external reality from this 
personal and subjective conception? Unquestionably, 
criticism may push its demands in this way to a point 
at which of necessity any positive proof becomes im- 
possible. This style of reasoning tends to nothing less 
than the destruction of all historical certainty ; for, 
in point of fact, history depends on nothing else than 



64 THE A POS TIE PA UL . 

subjective and individual testimony. This universal 
scepticism disarms assailants and defenders alike ; 
on its terms, negation and affirmation are equally 
unwarrantable. But the evidence of Paul is a fact ; 
as such, it must have had a cause and demands an 
explanation. To call it inexplicable, as Baur seems 
to do, is to leave the door open for the supernatural. 

This M. Holsten, the boldest and most faithful of 
his disciples, sees clearly enough. This writer has in 
his very remarkable work applied all his resources, 
the closest logic and most penetrating observation, in 
his attempt to explain the origin and natural forma- 
tion of this conviction in the apostle's mind. But has 
his criticism solved the psychological problem thus 
presented to it ? That it has done so, no one, I 
think, will venture to affirm. M. Holsten himself, 
after all his endeavours, remains in doubt ; he does 
not mean, he declares, to insist on the truth of his 
solution, only on its possibility. Practically, it 
amounts to the well-worn vision-hypothesis. Saul 
drew from Messianism the principal features of the 
person of Christ which he claims to have seen. So 
that all the materials of his vision were ready to 
hand. Furthermore, he had a natural tendency to 
ecstasy ; his physiological, no less than his spiritual 
constitution predisposed him to it. He had a ner- 
vous disposition easily over-wrought, a sanguino- 
bilious temperament ; and was very delicate, subject 
probably to epileptic attacks (2 Cor. xii. 7). That 
he had revelations and visions, both his epistles and 
the Acts assure us ; he spoke with tongues, worked 
miracles, had the gift of prophecy, and often boasts 
of his spiritual charismata (1 Cor. xiv. 18 ; Gal. ii. 2 ; 
2 Cor. xii. 1-9). What was the appearance of Christ 



PAUVS COXVEKSlOy. 6^ 

at his conversion but the first of these ecstatic visions, 
and that which gave rise to all the others ? 1 

Much might be said on the details of this argument, 
which is full of disputable points. The passage in 
2 Corinthians xii. 1-9 supplies its nucleus, and is 
indeed its only ground of support. This text, how- 
ever, not only fails to establish M. Holsten's theory ; 
properly understood, it even furnishes, to our thinking, 
a decisive proof against it. It shows that Paul, so far 
from comparing the manifestation of Christ to him at 
his conversion with the visions he afterwards enjoyed, 
laid down an essential difference between them. At 
the beginning of chapter xii., Paul proposes to give 
a full account of his visions, and commences with the 
first, which, far from being confounded with his con- 
version, is dated at least five years later (irpo iroov 
Se/careaadpaiv). He does violence to his feelings in 
making known this private aspect of his life. At 
the fifth verse he is checked by this repugnance, this 
sacred modesty, and suddenly takes quite the opposite 
course. Instead of glorying in his privileges, he will 
only glory in his infirmities. The visions referred to 
in this passage, it would seem, he had never previously 
related; and just as the insults of his enemies were on 
the point of compelling him to do so, he checks him- 
self and again drops the veil over these mysteries of 
his spiritual life. His ecstasies and visions do not 
belong to his ministry, and are not for others, only 
for God and himself: etre <yap e^io-rrjfiev, OecZ' etre 
aa)(f>povov/jL€v, v/jllv (2 Cor. v. 13). But so far from 
speaking of his conversion in the manner in which 

1 Holsten, Zum Evangelium des Petms und des Pdithis — 
Chrislusyision des Pmilus. Rostock, 1868. 

5 



65 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



he speaks of his visions, Paul shows neither reluctance 
nor embarrassment in describing it ; it was one of 
the staple subjects of his preaching. He spoke, in 
short, of the appearance vouchsafed to him with the 
same confidence with which the Twelve related those 
which they had witnessed. This event belonged not 
to the sphere of Paul's private and personal life 
(indicated by the words elre efeor^/xev), but to that 
of his apostolic life, aptly characterized in the phrase 
€?T6 ao)(f)povovfi€v, v/jllv. Paul therefore perceived 
an essential distinction between these two orders of 
facts, corresponding to that which existed between 
the two different spheres of his life to which they 
belonged. 

To make a second and equally decisive observation, 
Paul knew that his visions were spiritual c/iarismata, 
effects of the Spirit. He ascribes them to the Spirit's 
agency as their true cause ; whilst he attributes his 
conversion to a personal and corporeal intervention of 
the risen Jesus. In the phenomena of his visions he 
was transported, ravished into ecstasy, carried to the 
third heaven : at his conversion, Jesus descended to 
him and appeared before him in the midst 'of his 
ordinary life. Moreover, though Paul had several 
visions, he states that he had seen the risen Lord but 
ojice, and that this appearance was the last made by 
Jesus on earth. In the consciousness of the apostle 
there must therefore have existed a broad line of 
demarcation between the series of appearances then 
terminated {ea^arov Se nravrtov, I Cor. xv. 8), and the 
ecstasies and visions which lasted throughout the 
apostolic age. How could this marked distinction 
have arisen, except from the conviction that the ap- 
pearances of the risen Lord had a real and objective 



PAUL'S CONVERSION. 67 

character, such as the spiritual visions of ecstasy did 
not possess. 

Finally, if Christ's appearance to Paul had been an 
inward vision, it must have been not the cause, but 
the product of his faith. How could the mind of 
Saul the Pharisee have created such a vision, unless 
he were a Christian already? and if, on the other 
hand, he were a Christian already, how could he have 
attributed his conversion to this cause ? Such a 
transformation makes the enigma still more obscure. 
M. Holsten's ingenious explanations leave the mystery 
just where it was. 1 

These considerations, it seems to us, deprive the 
vision-hypothesis of all exegetical support. And we 
must not forget that the question of Saul's conversion 
is not to be explained as a mere isolated fact. It is 
attached to the question of the resurrection of Jesus 
Christ, and bound up inseparably with it. The solu- 
tion we give to the former of these miracles depends 
upon that of the latter. Any one who accepts the 
Saviour's resurrection would hardly find it worth 
while to question His appearance to this apostle. 
But the critic who, before entering on the question, 
is absolutely persuaded that there is no God, or that 
if there is, He never intervenes in human history, 
will doubtless set aside both facts, and would have 
recourse to the vision-hypothesis, were it ever so 
improbable. The problem is thus carried from the 
field of history into that of metaphysics, whither we 
must not pursue it. 



1 See Beysclilag's excellent criticisms on the vision-hypo- 
thesis, in the Studien lend Kritiken for 1864 and 1870. 



68 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



III. Paul's Conversion and his Theology. 

It only remains to define the dogmatic significance 
of this conversion. It was the generating fact, not 
merely of Paul's apostolic career, but of his theology 
besides. We find in this event — latent in the spiritual 
experiences and feelings attending it — all the great 
ideas and the leading antitheses which characterize 
his doctrinal system. His conversion was the fruit of 
God's grace, manifesting itself in him as a sovereign 
power which triumphed over his individual will. 
Paul rose from the ground the captive of that Divine 
grace to which henceforth he was to surrender him- 
self without reserve or condition (Gal. i. 16). Here 
are, in effect, the two terms of that universal anti- 
thesis which dominates his thought — God and man, 
grace and liberty, faith and works. 

Embraced within this wide antithesis, we must 
notice another, which is still more conspicuous, — I 
mean the radical opposition that displays itself be- 
tween law and faith, between the Gospel and Judaism. 

The other apostles came to Christ through the 
medium of the Old Testament and the prophecies. 
For them there was, as one might say, a raised 
ladder, which they climbed step by step, finding Jesus 
at the summit. In their eyes, the Law and the 
Gospel had never been in opposition ; they had never 
felt it necessary to renounce the old covenant in order 
to enter upon the new. This was the real cause of 
their hesitation and perplexity, when confronted with 
the great revolution that was about to take place. 

But Paul, from the first, was in a totally different 
position. The Gospel and Judaism had always 
seemed to him absolutely and radically opposed (Phil. 



PAULS CONVERSION. 69 



iii. 7, etc.). The antithesis existed in his mind before 
his conversion ; and it remained there. His conscience, 
laid hold of by God's grace, was abruptly and vio- 
lently forced from one extreme to the other. 

His adhesion to the Gospel was, above everything 
else, the complete negation of his previous life. For 
this reason it was that his doctrine and his career 
only attained their full development in the conflict 
between Judaism and Christianity — the old things 
and the new. The two terms of this dualism con- 
tinued to be the poles round which all his theology 
revolved. This conversion, as we see, exemplifies in 
the most striking manner the utter impotence of the 
ancient principle of justification by the works of the 
law, and the triumph of the new principle of justi- 
fication through faith and the grace of God (Rom. 
vii. 24, 25). Here lies the germ of the whole Pauline 
system. Our task will be to trace its progressive 
development during the rest of the apostle's life. 

To seek the origin of Paul's Christian universalism 
in his Hellenism is therefore, manifestly, an entire 
mistake. It is rather to be found in his rigid 
Pharisaism. We may safely say that if Saul had 
been less of a Jew, Paul the apostle would have been 
less bold and independent. His work would have 
been more superficial, and his mind less unfettered. 
God did not choose a heathen to be the apostle of 
the heathen ; for he might have been ensnared by the 
traditions of Judaism, by its priestly hierarchy and the 
splendours of its worship, as indeed it happened with 
the Church of the second century. On the contrary, 
God chose a Pharisee. But this Pharisee had the 
most complete experience of the emptiness of external 
ceremonies and the crushing yoke of the law. There 



7 HE APOSTLE PAUL. 



was no fear that he would ever look back, that he 
would be tempted to set up again what the grace of 
God had justly overthrown (Gal. ii. 18). Judaism 
was wholly vanquished in his soul, for it was wholly 
displaced. 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. 

WE are now in a position to understand the 
essential principle of Paul's gospel, and the 
leading elements which, from the beginning, entered 
into its working and form the creative factors of his 
Christian theology. 

The origin of his gospel, as we have just seen, is 
to be found in his conversion. Paul has well defined 
it in those three words by which he characterizes the 
essential content of this Divine revelation: It pleased 
God to reveal His Sou in me, airofcaXvyfrai, rbv vlbv 
avrov iv i/ubOL (Gal. i. 16). The object of this revela- 
tion, therefore, was simply the person of Christ. 
There is, as we have already said, no question here 
of that external manifestation which accompanied his 
conversion, but only of a revelation or inward illumi- 
nation. A veil had concealed from the Pharisee's 
eyes the Divine glory of the crucified One. The 
cross was to him a mystery, and a scandal (i Cor. i. 
18-24; n - 9j I0 )- This veil was now removed ; and 
on the instant what seemed luminous before was 
darkened, and what was dark came into light. 
Light, the most radiant, burst suddenly out of 
thickest darkness. We find a very exact and vivid 
reminiscence of this marvellous phenomenon in a 

71 



72 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



passage which is. in truth, beyond translation : On 6 
@eo? 6 eLTrcov i/c <t/cotov<s (poos Xd/juyjraL, 09 e\a/n\frev iv 
raU Kaphiais rjficov, 7rpo? (j)coTia/jubv ttj? yvooaeo)^ tt)? 
86^t]<; rod ©eov iv irpoaojircp Xpicrjov (2 Cor. iv. 6). At 
that decisive hour Paul saw shining on the brow of the 
victim of Calvary the Divine glory of the Son of God. 

But there is still more in these words, airoicaXv^ai 
rbv vtov avTov iv i/uoL In the same epistle Paul 
declares, when wishing to describe his life since his 
conversion : " It is no longer I that live, it is Christ 
that lives in me" (Gal. ii. 20 ; Phil. i. 21 ; Col. iii. 3, 4). 
His conversion, therefore, was something beyond a 
mere illumination. It was a profound crisis of his 
soul. The old Ego had been done away, and a new 
Ego emerged, whose vital principle is Christ Himself. 
Paul's conversion was nothing less than the spiritual 
entrance, the birth of Christ in his soul. In this 
lies the full significance of the phrase, airotcaXvtyai 
iv i/uoL. We find here for the first time that pre- 
position iv which occurs so often in the apostle's 
language, and which always indicates a mystic and 
indefinable communion. 

Such is the mysterious source of his life. Here also 
lies the root of his whole system of thought. We see 
what depths it reached, depths from which it drew 
unceasingly that rich nourishment which kept it 
always fresh and has given it an undecaying youth. 
Had Paul's theology been merely an abstract system, 
it would long ago have disappeared, to be found 
to-day only in the history of philosophy, — that her- 
barium of dead and desiccated ideas. But it lives 
and is still fruitful, because it is the manifestation 
of the immortal life of Christ Himself. 

What is that Christ who thus became the fountain 



THE GENESIS OF FAUVS GOSFEL. 



of the apostle's new consciousness and new life ? The 
words of 2 Corinthians v. 14-17 come to our aid, com- 
pleting and defining, in the clearest manner possible, 
the sense of the Galatian passage which we have just 
been studying. " We are possessed by the love of 
Christ, judging that if one died for all, all died with 
Him ; and He died for all, in order that the living 
should no longer live unto themselves, but unto Him 
who for their sakes died and rose again. Henceforth 
we know no man after the flesh. And even though 
we have known Christ after thejlesh, yet noiv we know 
Him so no more. If any one is in Christ, he is a new 
creature. The old things arc passed away ; all things 
are become new." 

Now what is it to have known Christ after the flesh, 
and to cease to know Him in that character ? In the 
apostle's life, these words can only refer to the period 
preceding his conversion. What then is the Christ 
whom Paul knew previous to that event? It was not 
the human and historical person of Jesus of Nazareth, 
whom most certainly he did not know as Christ. 1 
The only Christ whom he knew before his conversion 
was the Jewish Messiah, a national, exclusive Messiah, 
who should win his triumph by carnal means. This 
Christ he knows no longer. By His death and re- 
surrection Jesus destroyed this carnal notion of the 
Messiah ; and these events presented Him as a new 
Christ, a Christ icara irvevjua. But all Christians had 

1 This does not imply that Saul, brought up in Jerusalem 
from his childhood, studying at the feet of Gamaliel, and having 
a married sister in Jerusalem, might not have met Jesus, and 
heard Him preach in the temple. On the contrary, we consider 
that this is probable, and that his conversion, independently of 
human agency, cannot be very well explained otherwise. 



74 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



not reached this point ; a great number of them, for- 
getting the cross, hid the true character of Jesus 
behind the carnal glory of the Jewish Messiah, and 
doing so, knew nothing but a Christ according to the 
flesh, — that is, Christ without His death and resurrec- 
tion. It was quite another Jesus (Irjaovv aXkov) 
whom Paul's adversaries preached at Corinth (2 Cor. 
xi. 4). For Paul, in fact, there was an old and a new 
Christ, just as there was the old man, the man after 
the flesh, and the new man, the man after the spirit 
(ra ap^ala, ra icaiva : v. 17). Christ had died, and by 
His death abolished the flesh and all the relation- 
ships designated by this word. The men who are in 
Christ died and are raised with Him, and appear in 
Him as new men ; so that we may truly say that we 
no longer know any one after the flesh, since through 
this great crisis of death and resurrection everything 
has been transformed, both with regard to the Head 
and the members ; the old things are passed away, 
and everything made new. The Christ who entered 
the soul of Paul and dwelt there, was the Christ who 
had died and risen again ; for this reason He has 
effected so radical a change. It is not enough to 
say that the death of Christ disturbed Saul's early 
conceptions ; it has slain the Pharisee in him. By 
learning to know this new Christ, Saul is raised from 
the dead to a new life. 

Thus, from the very beginning, the whole Christian 
life of Paul depended on the death and resurrection 
of Jesus. These two great events first made for 
themselves in his heart the place that they were sub- 
sequently to occupy in his theology. How could it 
be otherwise? The death of Jesus, which had been to 
him the great scandal, must needs, in the very nature 



THE GENESIS OF PAULS GOSPEL. 75 

of things, become the great mystery. In proportion 
as Saul had been revolted by it, Paul was to devote 
himself to it. The object of his repugnance became 
his boast and the mainstay of his faith. The point 
where human wisdom stumbled, became that in which 
the wisdom of God was triumphantly displayed. This 
logical reversal of his views was so radical and so 
complete, that henceforward, in his eyes, the whole 
life of Jesus and the entire Gospel are summed up in 
the cross. His preaching is nothing more than a 
X0709 rod aravpov ; he would fain know nothing but 
Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ crucified (1 Cor. i. 18, 
23, 24 ; ii. 2). 

To this object all Paul's thoughts were linked, as 
to their organic centre ; this was their starting point, 
from which we shall find them advancing in all 
directions under the vigorous impulse of his dialectic. 
The resurrection of Jesus was the triumphant proof 
that this crucified man was the Messiah, the Son of 
God ; but such a death as that of the Son of God 
could in no wise be an accident, occurring without 
cause or consequences. If it has taken place, it 
must have been necessary ; and it has served to 
carry out God's own plan. What then is the mean- 
ing of this death ? Death is the wages of sin ; Christ 
not having known sin, did not die for Himself, but 
for humanity. His death could be nothing else than 
a sacrifice, through which, in the view of faith, the 
justifying grace of God is realized (hitcaioavvri Qeov). 
We will not push this deduction further at present 
The great theory of redemption was certainly not 
formed in the apostle's mind in a single day, and we 
do not wish to anticipate ; but we have here its out- 
line very clearly indicated. 



76 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Such is the essential content and the creative 
principle of that gospel which Paul justly claimed to 
have received as a direct revelation from Jesus Christ. 
He was on this matter, to use one of his own expres- 
sions, emphatically God- taught. He might well call 
this gospel my gospel, — that which had been given 
him by God, and made his own by close assimilation. 
On it he has stamped ineffaceably the mark of his 
original genius. 

I. Paul and the Historical Christ. 

But the fact that this inner revelation of Christ is 
independent of all human tradition makes it the more 
important to determine the relation in which it stood 
to the actual life and teaching of Jesus, and the nature 
of the link which united Paul's new consciousness 
to the historical personality of the Saviour. The 
question amounts to this : To what extent was Paul 
acquainted with Christ's earthly life ? and what in- 
fluence did this knowledge exert on the formation of 
his views ? 

We consider that the Tubingen school has dis- 
missed this question altogether too lightly. Accord- 
ing to that school, Paul was either very imperfectly 
acquainted with the life and historical teaching of 
Jesus, or else he despised its traditions as being a 
knowledge of Christ according to the flesh, such as 
would have made his gospel dependent on the teach- 
ing of the first apostles. But these two explanations 
are equally baseless. The first is only supported by 
2 Cor. v. 1 6, a passage which we have already dis- 
cussed. The distinction Paul makes there between 
Christ after the flesh and Christ after the spirit, as we 
have seen, is not a distinction between the historical 



THE GENESIS OF PAUVS G OS PEE 77 

Christ and the Christ dwelling in himself. Besides, 
we cannot see how the traditional knowledge of the 
doings and sufferings and teaching of Jesus could 
possibly interfere with the independence of his 
apostleship or the originality of his gospel. It is 
very clear that this external knowledge, however 
minute and exact it may have been, could not of 
itself make him an apostle, nor even convert him. 
Before his conversion, he had no doubt heard many 
particulars respecting Jesus of Nazareth ; but they 
remained in his memory as so much foreign and dead 
matter, altogether beyond his understanding. The 
inward revelation, while it irradiated his soul, lighted 
up at the same time the historical life of the Crucified. 
So far from being contradictory, this revelation and 
that external knowledge of Christ lent mutual con- 
firmation ; each was necessary to the other. Without 
the former, the historical tradition is mere worthless 
and inert matter ; without the second, the inward 
revelation could have produced only an idealistic 
theology, having no root in the realities of history. 
The two are related to each other as the soul is to 
the body, and form in combination an indissoluble 
organic unity. 

At first sight, Paul's knowledge of the historical 
Christ seems to have been very limited ; and we are 
surprised, on first examining his epistles for this pur- 
pose, to find so few allusions to the events of the life 
of Jesus and so few quotations from His discourses. 
But we should be mistaken in yielding to this first 
impression ; and it may very readily be explained. 

Modern criticism, which detects so many subtleties 
and such delicate shades of meaning, sometimes fails 
to perceive the simplest and most obvious things. It 



78 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

has forgotten, for instance, that Paul was a missionary 
before he was a theologian, and that he preached the 
Gospel in places where neither Jesus nor the Messiah 
had ever been heard of. Must he not then, of neces- 
sity, have described this strange Person and explained 
His title? Must he not have given in the syna- 
gogues of Asia such a conception and impression of 
Jesus — His life, miracles, death, and resurrection — ■ 
that candid minds were naturally led to declare, This 
Jesus was the Christ ? Can we imagine the apostle's 
missionary preaching apart from these conditions ? 

But all this early preaching and historical instruc- 
tion about the life of Jesus necessarily belonged to a 
period of Paul's life antecedent to that which gave 
birth to his great epistles ; and these letters, therefore, 
though not containing many Gospel narratives, assume 
in their believing readers a previous and fairly detailed 
acquaintance with the history of Jesus. Let us try to 
gather up the passing allusions and brief indications 
which are found scattered throughout them ; when 
collected, they will be found, as a whole, more 
definite and substantial than at first sight one could 
have ventured to hope. 1 

The first epistle to the Corinthians shows us what 
place Christian tradition held in Paul's preaching 
(i Cor. xi. 23, xv. 1-9). The death and resurrection 
of Jesus no doubt formed the centre of his earlier 
ministry. But the importance of the theological ideas 
which he attached to these great facts only made his 
care in relating them the more signal. He did this 



1 See Parch, Jahrbiicher fitr deutsche TheoL, 1858, pp. 1-85, 
Paiilus und Jesus ; and »Keim, Geschiclite Jesu von Nazara, 
vol. i. } p. 35 {Zeugniss des Pauhis). [Eng. trans., i., 54-64.] 



THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. 79 

with such exact and vivid detail, that after his 
description of the great scenes of the passion, his 
listeners felt as if they had seen them with their own 
eyes : oU tear 6cf)0a\{iovs 'Irjaovs Xpio-rbs irpoe^/pcupr) 
ev vfuv iaTavpw/jL6vo<i (Gal. iii. 1). What Paul had 
done in Galatia, he had certainly done at Corinth, and 
in all the Churches of Asia (1 Cor. xi, 23, xv. 1-9). 

Among- these historical details we may note several 
preserved in his letters, which are identical with those 
found in the Gospels. They were the rulers of the 
people {pi apxovres) who condemned Jesus (1 Cor. ii. 
8 ; Acts xiii. 27 ; comp. Matt. xxvi. 3). It was through 
an act of treachery, perpetrated at night (vv/ctl 
TrapehiSeTo), that He fell into their hands. In the 
course of this night, and before His betrayal, Jesus, 
during His last repast with His disciples, instituted 
the holy supper. The account that Paul gives of this 
in 1 Corinthians xi. 23 corresponds literally with that 
in Luke's Gospel. 

Paul knows that the Saviour's passion was the 
time of His weakness, and of His entire desertion ; 
and that He was overwhelmed with afflictions and 
outrages, — accepted without a murmur (2 Cor. xiii. 
4 ; Rom. xv. 3-6). Many other passages assume 
previous descriptions of His sufferings and death (rr]v 
veicpwo-iv tov Tt/ctoO Trepufripovres, 2 Cor. iv. 10 ; comp. 
Gal. vi. 17 ; Col. i, 24). According to Paul, Jesus 
was fastened to the cross with nails, and His blood 
poured forth (Col. ii. 14 ; comp. John xx. 25). The 
comparison he makes between this death and the 
sacrifice of the Paschal lamb tells us the exact time 
of its occurrence (1 Cor. v. 7). 

With no less precision Paul had related the burial 
and resurrection of Jesus. The words of 1 Corinthians 



8o THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

xv. 1-9 are nothing else than a summary of his 
preaching on this point. This resurrection occurred 
on " the third day." That we have here an historical 
statement, and not the application of a saying of 
prophecy, is proved by the substitution in the Pauline 
Churches of the first day of the week for the Sabbath 
([ Cor. xvi. 2). Finally, Paul seems, in this same 
chapter, to have arranged the different appearances 
of the risen Lord in chronological order ; and every- 
thing that follows leads us to infer that he had 
moreover insisted on the external and corporeal 
nature of this resurrection. 

The apostle, therefore, was perfectly familiar with 
the last scenes of the life of Jesus, and told the story 
of them with great exactness. The passion and resur- 
rection of Christ were not to him, as to the Gnostics, 
a pair of abstract notions, — the passion and triumph of 
an ideal Christ resembling the Sophia of Valentinus ; 
they were historical and concrete facts, preserved 
in their actual character, and with all their accom- 
panying circumstances. He sets before us the 
veritable cross on which Jesus of Nazareth had hung 
but a few years ago ; the tomb where His body was 
buried, and from whence He rose in triumph. Even 
had it been impossible to prove that Paul knew any- 
thing else of the historical life of Jesus, the manner 
in which he has examined and estimated these two 
great events sufficiently proves the connexion of 
his faith with the historical Christ, and forbids our 
reducing his theology to mere idealism. 

When he has related these last events in such 
detail, can we believe that the apostle ignored all 
that belonged to the previous life of Jesus ? Is it a 
very hazardous conjecture to suppose that during his 



THE GENESIS OF PAULS GOSPEL. Si 

fifteen days' visit to Peter at Jerusalem after his con- 
version, he questioned him minutely about the life 
of their common Master? Surely the term which 
Paul employs in Galatians i. 18, laroprjaai Kr]<f>av, 
allows us to think so. Besides, how could this eager 
follower of Jesus Christ do other than seize upon and 
master all that wealth of Gospel tradition so piously 
preserved by the early Christian communities, and 
reproduced in our first three Gospels ? 

If he never appeals to the Saviour's words to 
establish or defend his doctrines, this fact, however 
strange it may appear to us, encumbered as we are 
with scholastic methods, has nevertheless a cause 
and an explanation other than that of ignorance 
or contempt. The apostle was far from regarding 
the teaching of Jesus as a collection of sayings, an 
external law or written letter (ypdfifia), which he 
had nothing more to do than to quote at every turn. 
Christ was to him, above all things, a life-giving 
spirit, an immanent and fertile principle, producing 
new fruit at each new season. There was such a 
perfect identity in his eyes between the historical and 
the indwelling Christ, that he never separates nor 
distinguishes them, and even attributes to the former 
that with which the latter had inspired him, and to 
the latter that which unquestionably he owed to the 
former. We find a remarkable example of this 
identification in I Corinthians xi. 23. 

But was this a purely subjective idea ? When Paul 
expresses his certainty that his apostolic teaching 
is indeed the faithful interpretation of the Master's, 
is he the victim of an illusion ? Or is it not more 
natural to suppose that he had studied the discourses 
of Jesus, and knew them well enough to feel sure 

6 



32 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



that no one could seriously bring any of Christ's 
words in argument against him? If, after all, we still 
feel surprise at not meeting with more frequent quota- 
tions in his epistles, we must remember that the epistle 
of Peter, the Apocalypse, the Acts of the Apostles, and 
the first epistle of John contain still fewer. From the 
beginning, Christ was not so much the herald or 
preacher of the Gospel, as Himself the object of the 
apostles' faith and teaching. To know what Christ 
had said or done seemed less important than to love 
Him, to receive Him, and to give oneself to Him. 

There certainly existed for Paul, as for the other 
apostles, an objective, traditional teaching of Jesus. It 
is enough to recall the care and exactness with which 
he has preserved and transmitted to the believers 
at Corinth the very words used in instituting the 
Lord's supper (i Cor. xi. 23). The whole discussion 
on marriage and celibacy, which occupies the seventh 
chapter of the same epistle, furnishes a proof yet 
more decisive. The apostle distinguishes with perfect 
clearness between the Saviour's express command 
and his own inspiration, and repeatedly sets them in 
contrast : ovtc iyco aWa 6 Kvptos — iya) ov% 6 Kvpios 
(1 Cor. vii. 10, 12, 25). The commandment Paul 
refers to is found in the Gospels ; and on the points 
concerning which he declares he has received nothing 
from the Lord we find, as a matter of fact, that 
Jesus was silent. Should any one, notwithstanding 
this remarkable coincidence, refer this commandment 
to an inspiration from the indwelling Christ, he must 
in that case admit that when Paul gives his personal 
opinion in the 25th verse (yvcofirjv BlBcofit), he is 
speaking independently of his apostolic inspiration. 
But this is to come into collision with the 40th verse, 



THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. S3 

where he appeals to his inspiration for the very pur- 
pose of justifying this opinion : " I believe that I also 
have the Spirit of God." 

In chapter ix. 14 there occurs another quotation, 
introduced in a still more remarkable manner. The 
apostle wishes to establish the right of evangelists to 
live by the Gospel. He first gives a rational argu- 
ment, drawn from the nature of things ; then an 
exegetical argument taken from a passage in the 
Law : " Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth 
the corn " ; and finally he completes his proof by 
quoting a positive command of the Lord : 6 Kvpios 
hiera^ev (comp. Matt. x. 10 ; Luke x. 7). Evidently 
the word of Jesus comes in at the last, as the supreme 
and decisive authority. Observe further, throughout 
this passage, the images Paul employs to describe 
the work of the Gospel ; they are the same that Jesus 
loved to use : (frvreveiv aixirekwva, ironxaiveiv TroifJ-vrjv, 
(T7reipet,v, dept^ecv, aporpiav. Reminiscences like these 
are scattered through all the epistles : 

Comp. Rom. xii. 14, 17, 20 with Matt. v. 44, etc. 

„ 1 Thess. v. 1, etc. „ Matt. xxiv. 36, 44. 

„ I Cor. xiii. 2 „ Matt. xvii. 20. 

„ Acts xx. 35. 
Paul does not relate the events of the life of Jesus 
to any larger extent than he quotes His discourses $ 
but he assumes that they are known to his readers. 
To people who had never heard the principal Gospel 
narratives, his epistles would present insoluble enig- 
mas at every line. I need no further proof of this 
than the manner in which the apostle of the Gentiles 
speaks of the Twelve, and of the brethren of Jesus 
and His relations with them. 

There is one thing, however, calculated to impress 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



us more powerfully than all these isolated facts. It 
is the general picture Paul draws of the Saviour's life, 
so exactly answering to the impression left on us by 
the Gospel narratives as a whole. Jesus was essentially 
man ; nothing at first sight distinguished Him from 
other men (Rom. v. 15 ; Phil. ii. 7). He was born a 
Jew ; he lived under the law (Gal. iv. 4) ; He confined 
His ministry to the people of Israel, and continued 
till the end the minister of the circumcision (Rom. xv. 
8). The apostle speaks of Jesus as Jesus Himself 
speaks of the Son of man : He was poor, despised 
humble, obedient ; He did not come to be ministered 
unto, but to minister ; He took the rank and the form 
of a servant ; His whole life was service and obedience 
(ScaKovLa, inratcoi}). It is perfectly true, as Baur ob- 
serves, that Paul views the Saviour's life throughout 
in the light of His death, and sees in this death the 
climax of His ministry and the consummation of 
His obedience. But was it not from the same point 
of view that Christ Himself regarded His life and 
work ? . See Matt. xx. 28 ; Luke xxii. 27 ; Mark 
x. 3S ; John xii. 2J. 

The Christ who lived in the apostle's newly 
awakened consciousness was, therefore, by no means 
a mere ideal and subjective image. This indwelling 
Christ remained at the same time an external type — 
One whom Paul cherished in his memory and strove 
daily to know and imitate more perfectly. Indeed, 
the imitation of Christ is, as we know, an essential 
principle of the Pauline ethics ; and does not this 
principle imply of necessity an objective and his- 
torical model, which every believer keeps before his 
eyes (1 Cor. xi. 1 ; Phil. ii. 5)? In this way, Jesus 
is at once the immanent principle of sanctification 



THE GENESIS OE PAUL'S GOSPEL. T$ 

in the man, and the ideal of holiness realized before 
his eyes. It is impossible to detect any contradiction 
or breach between the indwelling and the historical 
Christ. The latter was essentially spirit (irvev^a). 
During His earthly life this Divine force was loca- 
lized ; it was inclosed in the limits of the flesh. But 
when the flesh was destroyed by death, this Divine 
force, which was the very soul of Jesus, displayed 
all its expansive power. Poured into the heart of 
believers, it made not only Christ's memory live again 
there, but His actual holiness. Christ Himself be- 
came the believer's interior life. 

Thus we see how the two Christs continued one, 
and how the apostle passed from the one to the other. 
Instead of being opposed in his ideas, they could 
not exist apart from each other ; they are mutually 
dependent and confirmatory. From this intimate 
blending of history and faith, of the subjective and 
objective in his mind, the Pauline theology resulted ; 
and in this combination lies its distinguishing feature. 
In brief, the apostle was so fully inspired by Jesus 
of Nazareth and understood Him so well, that his 
apostolic teaching, with all its originality and in- 
dependence, was, notwithstanding appearances, an 
entirely faithful interpretation of the Master's views. 

II. Paul's Use of the Old Testament. 

Besides this primary external factor in the genesis 
of Paul's system of thought we must notice a second, 
which, though much less important, was equally 
essential. I refer to the Old Testament, and the use 
which the apostle continued to make of it after his 
conversion. 

The faith in the Son of God, which had seized him 



16 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



in his strict Pharisaism, had destroyed the unity of 
his religious consciousness. He found himself placed 
between the ancient and venerated revelation which 
he could not possibly renounce, and the new revelation 
which had been forced upon him. So soon as the 
contending emotions of the first few days were passed, 
Paul must at once have set to work to re-establish 
the unity of his belief, and recover peace of mind. 
Nothing furthered the development of his views more 
than this long internal struggle. 

The first result of the revolution which had been 
wrought in him was to subordinate the old revelation 
to the new. The Christian faith served as a principle 
of criticism to direct him in his study of the Old 
Testament, sifting out its different elements and 
enabling him to estimate the worth of each. By this 
means he soon came to distinguish and contrast the 
Lazv and the Promise, and to proclaim the abolition 
of the one and the perfect realization of the other. 
But the Divine authority of the sacred writings in 
no wise suffered from these distinctions. If the old 
covenant ceased to exist as an economy of salvation, 
it became all the more important as a preparation and 
a prophecy. The typological method was the result of 
this situation, its function being to clear away contra- 
diction and re-establish harmony between the old and 
the new oracles. This method, which was no more 
than the inevitable result of the relationship that the 
new faith wished to maintain with the the old, was 
employed by all the New Testament writers. But 
Paul's rabbinical education gave him in this respect 
an immense advantage over the other apostles. He 
may be said to have read the Old Testament books 
with the eyes of a Christian, and the penetration of 



THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. 87 



a rabbi. Everything in this long history of God's 
people became prophecy ; its personages and events 
equally so with its discourses. Its language became 
transfigured ; the spiritual meaning shone forth 
through the veil of the literal sense. Thus a rich 
typology was created and evolved, which served to 
support and illustrate all the apostle's demonstrations. 
Only a few examples of this teaching are preserved 
in the epistles ; but this method must have held a 
much larger place in Paul's missionary teaching. 

It will not do to regard this typology as a mere 
formal accommodation to the Jewish mode of think- 
ing, or as a style of literary illustration. It is inherent 
in the matter of Paul's doctrine, and forms an integral 
part of it. At the same time, Baur goes much too far 
when he says that the Old Testament was to Paul the 
sole objective source of truth, the only external ground 
of his religious belief. As we have seen, he found a 
fuller and higher revelation in the person of Jesus. 
No ; it was not from the Old Testament, not by way 
of exegesis, that the apostle attained the ground on 
which his doctrine rests. If his faith depends on his 
exegesis, his exegesis depends still more on his faith. 
His convictions are not the result of his bold method 
of interpretation ; that method can only be explained 
by the new convictions, which of necessity gave rise 
to it. Paul borrowed little from the Old Testament 
beyond its forms ; it was an ancient mould into which 
he poured a new material. 

But we can understand how greatly his ideas must 
have been influenced by this constant effort to trace 
them in the old covenant. Nothing is better calcu- 
lated than allegory to develop an idea to its fullest 
extent. The famous allegory of Hagar and Sarah 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



should be studied from this point of view (Gal. iv. 
21-31). It is evident in this case, that if the idea 
created the image, the image in its turn was a won- 
derful help in defining the idea and developing its 
fulness. 

We now perceive how the different elements of the 
Pauline system were constituted. The inner revelation 
of Christ is its central and generating principle, to 
which the other two are related as the body is to the 
soul. Historical knowledge concerning Jesus, and 
the institutions and prophecies of the Old Testament, 
were in themselves nothing more than inert matter 
which the Pauline principle permeated and vivified, 
finding in them its constant nourishment, the means 
for its expression and realization. But that is not 
all. We must further ask, where the power lay that 
created the system, that united these different elements 
and gave to Paul's theology its eminently original 
character. This power consisted, and could consist in 
nothing else than the apostle's strong individuality. 
His spiritual individuality explains his doctrine, for 
it has produced it. Let us endeavour, in conclusion, 
to indicate its essential features. 

III. Paul's Idiosyncrasy. 
The lofty character of Paul has not always been 
properly apprehended, because it has too often been 
considered from a narrow point of view. Its striking 
originality seems to be due to the fruitful combi- 
nation in it of two spiritual forces, — two orders of 
faculty which are seldom found united in this degree 
in one personality, and which in the case of Jesus 
alone present themselves more perfectly blended and 
carried even to a further height than in the apostle. 



THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. 



I mean dialectic power and religions inspiration, the 
rational and the mystical element ; or, to borrow 
Paul's own language, the activity of vovs and that of 
irveufia. 

The rational or dialectic nature of the great apostle's 
doctrine has been very forcibly exhibited by Baur. 
Paul evidently belongs to the family of powerful 
dialecticians ; he ranks with Plato, with Augustine 
and Calvin, with Schleiermacher, Spinoza, Hegel. An 
imperious necessity compelled him to give his belief 
full dialectic expression, and to raise it above its con- 
tradictories. Having affirmed it, he confronts it at 
once with its opposite ; and his faith is incomplete 
till it has triumphed over this antithesis and reached 
a point of higher unity. 

It is interesting to study, in this aspect, the progress 
of ideas and the unfolding of the apostle's argument 
in his great epistles. From the particular question 
Paul's mind rises at one bound to the general principle 
governing the whole discussion. Having lighted up 
the subject from this height, he descends again with 
irresistible power to the level of fact. It is this dia- 
lectical procedure which imparts such crushing force to 
his logic. This method is apparent in the two epistles 
to the Corinthians, and still more in the epistle to 
the Romans. At the very outset Paul ascends to 
the general idea of righteousness (hucaioavvrj), which 
he at once divides into a negative and a positive con- 
ception. The first eight chapters are only the dialec- 
tical development of these two opposing ideas. The 
apostle follows each to its ultimate consequences. 
He shows — with what power of logic we know — how 
the former notion, that of justification by works, soon 
disproves itself, and inevitably ends in the despairing 



90 TEE APOSTLE PAUL. 

cry, "Oh, wretch that I am ! who shall deliver me from 
this body of death ? " But at the same time he 
follows the development of the latter conception in 
all its fruitful consequences, till we hear the final song 
of triumph : " Who shall separate us from the love of 
God ? " (Rom. vii. 25 ; comp. viii. 35, 39.) His dialectic 
power is certainly the mainspring of Paul's thought. 
It is this which impelled it forward, which gave it 
organic form and created the rich and powerful 
system in which it has embodied itself. 

However important this rational element may be, 
those who look no further only see the surface of the 
Pauline thought. Beneath this reflective force of 
reason there is that which we have called, for lack of 
another name, the pnenmatical life, taking its rise at 
the point of contact between the human soul and the 
invisible world. Paul's habitual state is, in fact, not 
that of a mind which reasons, but of a soul which 
contemplates and adores. Beyond the reasoning 
faculty there lay in him the realm of intuition, — truth 
palpable to the soul, deep feeling which nourished 
and gave birth to thought, and which thought was 
never quite able to express. It was in this region that 
he felt those ineffable things which it is not possible 
for man to utter (appj)Ta ptjfiara, a ov/c e£6v avdpumw 
Xakrjaai, 2 Cor. xii. 4). There we have a mysterious 
life at once active and passive, an inexplicable inter- 
course between the spirit of man and of God, which 
the psychical man with his ordinary common sense 
regards as foolishness (1 Cor. ii. 14); but in which lay, 
nevertheless, the apostle's chief wealth and power, and 
his supreme consolation. 

This condition of soul cannot be analysed, because 
the soul on entering it ceases, to some extent, to 



THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. 91 

belong to and observe itself. It is the sphere of 
ecstasy, of vision, and of all the phenomena that we 
describe as inspiration. It is a permeation of the 
individual soul by mysterious forces. In it, strangely 
enough, we find our personal life expand, while at the 
same time our dependence increases. To condemn 
such a state as morbid is, in my opinion, a proof 
of great levity of mind and rashness of judgment. 
Xo doubt this mystical tendency may be perverted 
and corrupted, like all other faculties. But it is 
not in itself a disease, any more than they, for it is 
natural to every human soul. I am perfectly aware 
that ordinary psychology gives it no place in its tra- 
ditional categories ; but these categories are far from 
including the whole of life. Where could we find a 
more wholesome mental constitution than belonged 
to Socrates, or to Luther ; where a more true and 
delicate conscience than that of Joan of Arc ? And 
yet we know that their spiritual life had its source 
far beyond the sphere of pure reason. If this faculty 
of mystical exaltation is a disease, we should have 
to acknowledge that Jesus, despite the harmony of 
His nature, possessed an unsound mind ; for He 
had His moments of ecstasy — sacred moments, which 
a coarse, vulgar understanding profanes by calling 
them hallucinations (Mark i. 12 ; iii. 21 ; Luke 
ix. 29 ; x. 18). No ; this is not the sign of a morbid 
disposition. In truth, he is much rather the sick 
man who has never known any state but that of 
dry, cold reason. What else is religion, what is 
prayer and adoration, but an exaltation of spirit — to 
employ again Paul's own language, an iv irvevixcni 
elvat ? 

We recognise this mysterious life underlying all 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



the reasonings of the apostle. It constitutes the 
foundation of his being ; and we feel the throb of its 
mighty pulsations through all his dialectic machinery. 
This dialectic is, in fact, a mere instrument which 
of itself creates nothing. The life of the Spirit, an 
ever gushing spring, throws out the material which 
his logic interprets, elaborates, and organizes. This 
inner life had been created in Paul by the first 
revelation of Christ in his soul. Christ living in him 
continued to reveal Himself in and through him. 
This abiding and inward revelation forms the basis 
of apostolic inspiration. It supplies to him an abso- 
lute assurance, springing from his conviction of being 
in immediate possession" of the truth ; it is an un- 
erring instinct that guides the apostle alike in thought 
and action. From that hour this pneumatical life 
remained in him, and was ever growing and in- 
creasing. It manifested itself not only in the joy, 
the strength and authority that it gave him, but in 
extraordinary phenomena and exceptional chart's- 
uiata, in his gift of healing, his speaking with tongues, 
his ecstasies, visions and revelations (2 Cor. xii. 12 ; 
I Cor. xiv. 13 ; 2 Cor. xii. 1). 

In this mysterious sphere great problems were 
solved, and great resolutions taken. Whenever the 
apostle reaches a critical stage of his career, we find 
one of these inner revelations occurring, to show 
him what course to pursue and to put an end to 
his hesitations. Just when his anxiety is keenest 
and his excitement most intense, there comes to him 
a sudden illumination. We find this phenomenon 
occurring in all the great crises of his life. Thus 
on his first encounter with the Judaizers at Antioch, 
it was a revelation that pointed out to him the way 



THE GENESIS OF PAUL'S GOSPEL. 93 

to Jerusalem (Gal. ii. 2). When on the point of 
leaving that city to begin his great mission to the 
heathen, he had a vision in the temple (Acts xxii. 
18). It was a vision again that directed his course 
to Europe (Acts xvi. 9). On another, less familiar 
occasion, when, buffeted and beaten by Satan's mes- 
senger, he despaired of his apostleship, there re- 
sounded in his ears the comforting words : " My grace 
is sufficient for thee " (2 Cor. xii. 9). Lastly, during 
that frightful tempest which drove the vessel bearing 
him to Rome upon the shores of Malta, a vision 
came to assure Paul that he should see Rome and 
Caesar (Acts xxvii. 24). 

We recognise therefore that Paul's apostolic in- 
spiration bore the chief part in the genesis and 
development of his belief. But we must understand 
its working differently from the way in which it has 
been understood hitherto. Faith without criticism, 
and criticism without faith seem to me to result 
equally in a moral impossibility. The first assumes 
that this theological system — so human, rational, 
and individual in its traits — fell straight from heaven 
into Paul's mind ; the latter makes Paul out an 
enthusiast, a sort of Swedenborg, who mistook his 
own ideas for a revelation from God. Let us take 
the gospel of Paul for what it was — not a series of 
scholastic formulae, but the positive and immanent 
revelation of Christ, which while it continued to 
unfold itself in the hidden depths of his conscious- 
ness, displayed its ethical product in the fruits of 
righteousness, and its intellectual result in his theories 
and his ideas. Thus we find it render a priceless aid 
to our faith, without imposing a burdensome yoke 
upon our understanding. 



94 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



Being now in possession of all the elements which 
combined to form the Pauline system, we might en- 
deavour to reconstruct it a priori^ by way of logical 
deduction. But we shall resist this temptation. To 
construct it in this way would only be to cramp 
and petrify it. Paul's theology was not developed 
after this fashion ; it was not wrought out in solitude. 
Its development was logical, no doubt, but slow and 
laborious notwithstanding. The apostle's circum- 
stances, his external conflicts and practical necessities, 
have left their impression deeply marked upon his 
doctrine. The course of this historical development 
we must now proceed to recover and describe. 



BOOK II. 

FIRST PERIOD, OR PERIOD OF MISSIONARY 
ACTIVITY. 

From 35 to 53 A.D. 

PAUL'S missionary preaching was, unquestion- 
ably, the earliest historical outcome of his system 
of belief. It occupied a period of nineteen or twenty 
years — the longest in his life, but also that in which 
he wrote the least ; and it therefore remains com- 
paratively in the shadow. 

During these long years the greater part of Paul's 
apostolic work was accomplished. It was the period 
of his great journeys, of his fairest hopes and his early 
successes. Then it was that, in Asia and Greece, 
he conquered for himself the wide sphere of which 
his great epistles show him in possession. It is not 
surprising that during this time he wrote- but little. 
There was no occasion for it. Oral preaching of 
necessity everywhere preceded written preaching; and 
the work of founding Churches had to be undergone, 
before the labours of their edification or of doctrinal 
controversy were possible. 

The missionary character of this first period 
naturally determined the special form in which the 
apostle's doctrine was cast. It cannot be doubted 

95 



96 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

that when preaching to Jews or Pagans for the first 
time, he presented his gospel to them in a fashion 
essentially different from the learned and logical 
exposition of his great epistles. 

Those who refuse to recognise the true Paul except 
in the abstruse dialectician of the great epistles, forget 
that he was a missionary, and must have addressed 
himself in the first instance to women, to working 
men, to the ignorant, to little children — indeed, to 
all sorts of low people (i Cor. i. 28). If he had 
spoken to them as he afterwards wrote, he would not 
even have been understood. But when we find this 
man, meagre and feeble in appearance as he was, 
exercising such an irresistible ascendency over every 
one who came near him, and from Damascus to 
Rome, wherever he sets his foot, becoming a cause 
of disturbance and popular excitement, can we doubt 
that beside his powers of abstract thought and logic, 
Paul had a striking, impressive utterance, and set 
forth his faith, in the first instance, under a very 
concrete and palpable form? It was then that he laid 
the historical basis upon which the laborious edifice 
of his religious thought was afterwards to be reared. 

His doctrine, therefore, could not have at this 
time the dialectic character that conflict was to im- 
part to it. It is, as it were, wrapped up in itself, 
taking shape only in the general and oratorical form 
of preaching. Yet it does not remain stationary ; it 
advances all the while, stimulated in its progress by 
success and fructified by experience. These years 
were a long, obscure period of gestation. It is cer- 
tainly to be regretted that, for the purpose of tracing 
this inner progress, we have not more numerous, and 
especially more positive, documents belonging to the 



FIRST PERIOD. 07 



period. But is not that an additional reason for try- 
ing to turn those that remain to us to better account ? 

After the fact of Paul's conversion, which is here 
our secure starting point, we have his first mis- 
sionary discourses in the Acts, an indirect echo of 
his preaching no doubt, but far from being unfaithful. 
With these discourses the two letters to the Thessa- 
lonians are in close connexion and sequence, resum- 
ing and carrying forward their teaching. Finally, 
at the close of this first period, we have the discourse 
at Antioch addressed to Peter and the Judaizers, 
which has been preserved in the epistle to the Gala- 
tians (chap. ii. 15-21). 

These, I frankly admit, are but scant, uncertain 
way-marks on a very long road. But do they not 
form a progressive and ascending series, and indicate 
unmistakably the general direction that the apostle's 
doctrine naturally followed, under the pressure of 
logic and of circumstances ? 



CHAPTER I. 

THE MISSIONARY DISCOURSES IN THE ACTS.— THE 
TWO EPISTLES TO THE THESSALONIANS. 

I. Paul's Discourses in the Acts. 

THE missionary discourses preserved in the Acts 
are three in number, delivered at Antioch in 
Pisidia (xiii. 16-41, 46, 47), at Lystra (xiv. 15-17), 
and at Athens (xvii. 23-31). The first was addressed 
to Jews ; the other two to Gentiles. Do these dis- 
courses furnish us with material for delineating the 
apostle's preaching ? 

This question has been answered in different, but 
for the most part in equally arbitrary fashions. Be- 
fore replying to it, we must endeavour to gain a 
definite conception of the preaching itself and its 
contents. We can do so, I think, by combining 
certain scattered indications in the later epistles, 
which hitherto have been neglected. These indica- 
tions will furnish us with a sure starting point, and 
moreover with an excellent standard of appreciation. 

Paul himself has given us a summary of his apo- 
stolic preaching in his first epistle to the Corinthians : 
" I call to your mind, brethren, the gospel that I have 
preached unto you, which ye have received, and in 
which ye stand fast. ... I delivered unto you 

that which also I received : above all, that Christ 

98 



PAULS MISSIONARY PREACHING. 99 



died for our sins according to the Scriptures ; that He 
was buried ; that He was raised again according to 
the Scriptures. . . . This is what / and the other 
apostles preach, and what you have believed" (i Cor. 
xv. i-ii). To this passage should be added the 
following : I Cor. xi. 23 ; Gal. iii. 1 ; Rom. ix. 4, 
5 ; 1 Thess. i. 10. It is manifest that the apostle's 
preaching consisted, above everything else, in a recital 
of the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus, with 
scriptural arguments designed to prove that Jesus 
was the Christ, and that in Him there was remission 
of sins. Affirmation predominates here over reflection, 
historical facts over theological ideas. Paul's preach- 
ing, in its general character, did not differ essentially 
from that of the Twelve. Prophecy, it appears, was 
from the first Paul's grand argument in debate with 
the Jews (Rom. i. 2 ; iii. 21 ; iv. ; Gal. iii.); and the 
author of the Acts is perfectly correct when he says 
that the apostle in the synagogue of Thessalonica 
reasoned with the Jews from the Scriptures (aivo twv 
ypcuficbv), showing from them that Christ must needs 
suffer and rise again from the dead (Acts xvii. 2, 3). 
There could not be a better summary of Paul's 
preaching in the synagogues. 

How did he address his pagan hearers ? The 
epistles leave no doubt on this point either. Accord- 
ing to Romans i. 18-23, the Gentiles' chief offence 
lay in allowing the idea of the true God to become 
obscured and lost. With their religious consciousness, 
their moral conscience became darkened ; still, there 
remained in their nature some gleams of light. Their 
conscience was inwardly disturbed, accusing and 
defending itself by turns, unable to find rest (Rom. ii. 
15). Here it was that Paul evidently found the basis 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



and starting point of his appeals. To restore the 
primitive idea of the one invisible God by showing 
the vanity of worshipping idols ; to awaken the moral 
consciousness, by giving it a foresight of the wrath 
of God ready to punish all iniquity ; to renew it by 
preaching repentance, and faith in Jesus the Saviour 
and the Judge, — such must have been the apostle's 
first and constant endeavour when in the midst of 
heathenism (i Thess. i. 9 ; 2 Cor. vi. 16, etc.; Eph. 
iv. 17, 18 ; Rom. i. 19 ; ii. 16). 

When we compare with this twofold result the 
missionary discourses put into Paul's mouth in the 
Acts, we find a correspondence sufficiently exact, at 
least in regard to their fundamental ideas. These 
discourses are not literal reproductions of the apostle's 
words ; they are a little blunted and indistinct, and 
too much resemble those of the other preachers ot 
the Gospel. In drawing up the discourse at Antioch 
in Pisidia, for example, the writer has evidently 
Stephen's address and Peter's Pentecostal sermon 
in his recollection. But to infer from these resem- 
blances that the addresses in question are merely 
free compositions and have no historical value, is, in 
my opinion, going too far. Although their tenor is 
very general, original features and bold and novel 
ideas are not altogether wanting ; and there are 
passages in which we distinctly catch the inimitable 
accents of Paul's voice. It will be well to analyse 
them more closely. 

The discourse delivered in the synagogue of 
Antioch in Pisidia has three essential divisions. The 
first, relating the history of the Jewish people up to 
the time of David, recalls the beginning of Stephen's 
address (xiii. 16-23). It must, however, be acknow- 



PAUL'S MISSIONARY PREACHING. 



ledged that if it presents the same history, this 
passage exhibits it from a new point of view. It is 
no longer the people's ingratitude, but the idea of 
the promise which guides Paul as he proceeds in his 
course across the wide field of the history of Israel. 
And is not the summing up of the history under the 
idea of the promise an essentially Pauline concep- 
tion ? Besides, we find that Paul makes David the 
terminus of his historical exposition, instead of de- 
scending, like Stephen, to the time of Solomon and 
the temple. For it was from the family of David 
that the Messiah was to come. 

Acts xiii. 23. Romans i. 2, 3. 

Tovtov o 0£Js cxtto tov *0 TrpoeTrrjyyeiXaTO Sta ruiV 

o-7T£/D/x.aro? kolt lirayyeXtav irpocfir]TO)U avrov, . . . Trepl 
7/yaye tJj 'IcrpGu/X craiTrjpa tov vlov avrov tov yevofUvov 
*Itj(TOvv. i>< cnvipfxaro^ Aaj3i$ Kara 

<xup/<a. 

A more novel and characteristic Pauline trait is 
the profound distinction made in regard to the Old 
Testament between the lazv and the promise, — the 
one being pronounced impotent (ver. 39), and the 
other realized in Christ (ver. 32). 

The second part of the discourse (vers. 24-37) shows 
the fulfilment of the promise in the death of Jesus. 
Its details might very well have been taken from the 
Third Gospel ; though it will be observed that Paul 
says nothing about the Saviour's public labours. He 
dwells solely on three points : the sufferings and 
death, the burial, and the resurrection of Jesus, — that 
is, on the very points which are emphasized in 1 
Corinthians xv. 3, 4. Notice above all the reference, 
so remarkable in this place, to the intermediate event 



102 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

of the burial, which has no importance in the preach- 
ing of the other apostles, but which had an essential 
bearing on Paul's ethical conception of faith and 
baptism (Rom. vi. 3, 4). 

The Pauline cast of thought is still more obvious 
in the third and subjective part of the discourse (vers. 
38-41). Certainly we do not find here as yet the 
theory of expiation, nor that of justification by faith ; 
they are equally wanting, as we shall see, in the two 
epistles to the Thessalonians. The germ of these 
doctrines, however, is present : Sta tovtov v/jlIv aipeais 
dfiapricov /carayyeWerat. The words Slcl tovtov do 
not relate to KdTayyeWeTai, which would not make 
sense, but to afaais d/juapTioov. Peter had said at 
Pentecost : " Repent, and be baptized every one of 
you in the name of Jesus, for the remission of your 
sins." There is much more implied in Paul's phrase. 
The remission of sins, instead of being connected 
with baptism, is associated here with the death and 
resurrection of Jesus, in and through which redemp- 
tion is objectively realized. It is also at the same 
time, a complete and absolute justification : kclI airo 
iravT(ov a)v ovk 7]Svpi]07]t€ ev vofiw Mcovcrecos Sitcaico- 
6f}vai, ev tovt(o 7ra? 6 irio-Tevcov Slkcliovtcli. Justifica- 
tion by faith is here presented in its negative form. 
But, as M. Reuss has remarked, it is under this form 
that the idea must have first originated in Paul's 
mind. The passage is a perfectly just expression of 
the experience which Paul himself had made of the 
ineffectiveness of the law. Add to this, that it would 
be difficult to imagine a phrase more true to Paul's 
peculiar style. In the first place, the very singular 
grammatical form of the sentence is Pauline (comp. 
Rom. xv. 18). Secondly, its terms are all found 



PAULS MISSIONARY PREACHING. 103 

amongst those most characteristic of the epistles : 
y8vi>)]6i]Te ev v6[x<o (comp. Rom. viii. 3 : to dBvvarov 1 ov 
vo/jlov); htKaioiOrjvai construed with airo (comp. Rom. 
vi. 7) ; and the general and comprehensive phrase 7ra? 
6 Tri<JTevcov (comp. Rom. i. 16 ; iii. 22). Lastly, in the 
whole proposition, iv tovtw 7ra? 6 Tna-revcov huccuovTat,,. 
the words eV tovtg) cannot be grammatically related 
to TTicTTevcov — which, however, would still express a 
Pauline idea (Gal. iii. 26) — but must be attached to 
Sifccuovrai, conveying a meaning far more original and 
profound (comp. Gal. ii. 17 : hLK,cuw6rjvai ev XpiarS). 
Verses 46 and 47 mark the transition by which 
the Gospel passed the Jews to address itself to the 
Gentiles : " It was necessary that the word of God 
should first be spoken to you (yfuv rjv avayfccuov 
TpcoTov ; comp. Rom. i. 16: 'lovhaio* irpCirov). But 
since you reject it, and judge yourselves unworthy of 
eternal life, behold, we turn to the Gentiles." This 
double experience, often repeated, of the obstinate 
unbelief of the one people, and the receptiveness of 
the other, gradually created in the apostle's mind the 
conviction that the kingdom of God was about to be 
transferred from the Jewish to the Gentile nations, — 
a conviction entirely opposed to the hope to which the 
apostles of the circumcision who remained in Palestine 
fondly clung. Paul was the instrument of a new and 
radical evolution of God's plan. His experience, as 
it widened into a general principle, naturally took in 
his eyes the shape of that Divine law which he was 
afterward to interpret and formulate in the ninth, tenth, 
and eleventh chapters of the epistle to the Romans. 
At the same time, he gained a clearer understanding 
of his special vocation as apostle to the Gentiles. 

A vast horizon was now opening before his eyes. 



104 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



As the heathen world, with its history and its 
destinies, entered more and more into his thoughts, 
they could not fail to gain a greatly wider scope. 
This epoch is marked by the two discourses of Lystra 
and Athens. They are naturally associated together ; 
for indeed they express the same idea. 

These two addresses being more original than that 
of Antioch, have excited critical suspicions to a less 
degree. In the Athenian discourse especially, so 
exquisite in rhetorical style and so admirable in its 
profundity of thought, one can scarcely refuse to 
recognise the master's touch. It is, in fact, a piece 
of apologetics of a new order ; and there is nothing 
to compare with it either in preceding or in following 
discourses. 

Paul's preaching no longer finds its starting point 
in the Old Testament, but in the moral and religious 
consciousness of humanity (comp. Rom. i. 19). 

Acts xiv. 15. 1 Thess. i. 9. 

€vayyeXit,6fxevoi . . . Trtos eTrecrrpei^are 

V/Xa? O.TTO TOVTOiV 7W /XOTaiW TTpoS TOV ®COV U.7TO TWV 

Z—Mjrpifaiv iirl ©eov £a>i/ra. eiSioXoiv SovXeveiv Qsoj £aWi 

Kal a\r)6ivu). 

But in these two discourses there is something 
beyond the general notion of God, which belonged 
properly to Jewish theology much more than to Chris- 
tian teaching. They are an attempt to comprehend 
paganism and its history from the standpoint of the 
new revelation ; they are a sketch of that philosophy 
of history which the apostle was destined afterward 
to complete. Notice, to begin with, his new and 
profound conception of paganism. " I find you, O 
Athenians, devout to excess. Passing through your 



r.irrs .v/sszoxakv preachzxc. 



city, and looking at your temples and altars, I have 
found one with this inscription, To the unknown 
God ! What you worship in ignorance, I come to 
make known to you " 'Acts xvii. 22, 23}. In poly- 
theism thus understood Paul could have no difficulty 
in finding a point of attachment for the worship of 
the true God. That paganism which the Jews, and 
Paul himself, were accustomed to regard as a pure 
negation of piety, has here a positive value assigned 
to it ; and is in this way brought into the plan o\ 
salvation prepared by God for all humanity. The 
difference between Jews and Gentiles is reduced to 
its minimum. God has made all nations of one blood. 
He is not the God of the Jews alone, but also of the 
Gentiles (Rom. iii. 29). His providence has regulated 
the destiny not only of Israel, but of the Gentile 
nations as well, determining the place, the time, and 
the boundaries of their earthly habitation. They have 
walked in darkness, it is true, groping their way ; but 
they have been moving towards a goal fixed by God 
Himself. In the Divine plan, the history of paganism 
unfolds itself in a line parallel with that of Israel, and 
both meet at the cross of Jesus Christ. Thus the 
universalism of the new Gospel found expression ; and 
thus was formed in the mind of Paul that £reat 
historical plan which he will expound in the epistle 
to the Romans. 

The Athenian address was interrupted, and its 
specifically Christian portion remained undeveloped. 
But on comparing 1 Thessalonians i. 9, 10 and Acts 
xvii. 30, 31, it is easy to see that Paul would have 
confined himself to the assertion of a few very simple 
ideas and essential facts : the necessity of repentance, 
the imminence of the last judgment, the death and 



106 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

resurrection of Jesus, and deliverance from the wrath 
to come. 

Such was Paul's early missionary preaching. If 
the discourses of the Acts do not give us his whole 
theology, yet they mark the first stage in the develop- 
ment of his system. The experiences of this epoch 
were so many fertile germs out of which, under the 
influence of the apostle's intense meditation, a rich 
harvest of profound views and great thoughts would 
shortly be produced. 

II. 

The Two Epistles to the Thessalonians. 

These two epistles are connected with the dis- 
courses we have just analysed, alike in their chrono- 
logical order and in the nature of their ideas. 

It will be noticed, in the first place, how readily 
the two letters adjust themselves to the setting fur- 
nished by the account of Paul's second missionary 
journey in the Acts, and what constant harmony 
exists between them and it. In the address of 
both letters we read the names of the three mis- 
sionaries who appear in the narrative : Paul, Silas, 
and Timothy (i Thess. i. I ; 2 Thess. i. 1). Silas, 
moreover, is mentioned before Timothy ; his name 
ranks second in the epistles as it does in the Acts 
— a fact all the more surprising, inasmuch as Silas' 
name only occurs once besides in the rest of Paul's 
epistles. This circumstance is inexplicable on the 
hypothesis of a pseudo-apostolic authorship of the 
two letters ; but it is fully confirmed by a phrase 
in the second epistle to the Corinthians, where. also 
the second place is assigned to Silas (chap. i. 19). 

Furthermore, we gather from the two epistles that 



PAULS MISSIONARY PREACHING. 107 

Paul arrived at Thessalonica from Philippi, and that 
from Thessalonica he passed on to Athens (1 Thess. 
ii. 2 and iii. 1 ; comp. Acts xvii. 1 and 16). We find 
reference made in very precise terms to the ill-treat- 
ment that he and his friends had been subject to at 
Philippi : irpoTraOovre^ kclI v(3pLa6evres, /cadcos otSare, 
iv <pL\LTnroi<;, iirapp , r](Tiaadp J ^Qci\a\r\(jai 7rpo? vfias to 
evayyiXiov tov Oeov iv ttoWw aycovi (i Thess. ii. 2). 
This boldness and great contention answer very well 
to the account of the Acts (xvii. 1-9). Again, it 
appears from the two epistles that the majority of 
Christians at Thessalonica were of heathen origin ; 
and this is just what is said in Acts xvii. 4 : rtov 
re aeftofievcov 'EWijvcov irXfjdo^ 7ro/\.u, yvvcutccov re 
twv 7rpa)Tcov ovK oXlyai. The Jews, on the contrary, 
had violently opposed the preaching of the Gospel, 
and having rejected it themselves, did their utmost 
to prejudice the heathen against it and to make 
Paul's ministry in Thessalonica impossible (Acts 
xvii. 5 ; comp. 1 Thess. ii. 15, 16). These statements 
remind us at every point of the narrative of the 
Acts : nay, the phraseology of this last passage 
recalls its very style (itcSicofceiv, Kaikveuv rj/ias to£? 
edveaiv \a\i)aat iva awOwaiv). It was amid affliction 
and persecution that the Christians at Thessalonica 
received the Gospel (Acts xvii. 5 ; comp. 1 Thess. 
i. 6 ; ii. 14). Finally, these persecutions compelled 
Paul to remove from Thessalonica prematurely and 
to leave unfinished the work so full of promise which 
he had begun there (Acts xvii. 10 ; 1 Thess. iii. 1-5 
and 10: KaTapriaat ra vareprjixa-ra tt}? 7rtcrre&)? v/icov). 1 

1 This very striking agreement has been fully brought out by 
Baur in his Paiilus, vol. ii., p. 97 [Eng. trans., ii., 85 ff.]. He 



ioS THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

On the other hand, the whole character of the 
two letters is such that they can only be under- 

makes use of it as an " unmistakable " proof that the author of 
the two epistles borrowed their historical setting from the Acts, 
and at the same time imitated the style of that narrative. But 
it is surprising that a writer who so scrupulously copies the 
Acts in the first chapters of his epistle should contradict its 
statements in the third chapter, making Paul and Timothy 
meet first at Athens, when, according to the Acts, they only 
joined each other at Corinth (Acts xviii. 5) ; though here, 
according to Baur, the writer no longer wished to imitate the 
Acts, but the epistles to the Corinthians, making Timothy go 
backwards and forwards between Athens and Thessalonica, just 
as Titus between Corinth and Ephesus ! 

More than this, in the second edition of Baur's Paulus we 
find two opinions respecting the epistles to the Thessalonians 
which present a flagrant contradiction, — one which neither 
Baur nor M. Zeller, his editor, appears to have noticed. In the 
body of his work [vol. ii., pp. 85-88], Baur demonstrates that the 
author of the two epistles was acquainted with the Acts and 
imitated its style, and that the passage in 1 Thess. ii. 14-16 
had no other source ; whence it is easy to conclude that since the 
Acts, according to Baur, cannot have been written before 120 or 
130 A.D., these two epistles date at the earliest from 130 or 135 
A.D. But at the end of this second volume is a dissertation 
in which Baur adopts Kern's idea, that the Antichrist can be no 
other than Nero; and hence, according to him, one of the two 
epistles was written in the reign of Vespasian — Vespasian being 
the Kaxiywy who delays Nero's return — and the other after the 
fall of Jerusalem ! We must, however, make our choice between 
these two dates, and this double series of arguments. One 
might perhaps say, in order to reconcile them, that the author of 
the two epistles had before his eyes the very journal of travels 
which the writer of the Acts afterwards inserted in his narra- 
tive, and which might be known in 67 or 68 A.D. Even this 
would not remove the difficulty, so far as Baur's exposition is 
concerned ; for beside his unwillingness to accept the idea of a 
journal of travel, he asserts that the style of our two epistles 
is strictly moulded upon the general style of the Acts. 



PAUL'S MISSIONARY PREACHING. 109 

stood in this historical setting, and in connexion 
with this period. They contain nothing either of 
the keen and profound polemics of the great epistles, 
nor of the lofty speculation belonging to those of the 
Captivity. TJiey are as distinct from each of these 
groups as they are allied both in form and substance 
to the discourses of the Acts. In them Paul is in 
truth only preaching from a distance ; he continues 
and completes by letter his oral instruction. Their 
originality consists just in this practical character. 
They were written without premeditation, and we 
must not expect to find in them skilful construction 
or logical divisions. 

The traditional division of Paul's epistles into the 
dogmatic and the hortatory is here entirely inap- 
plicable. Dogmatic pre-occupations are altogether 
wanting. The doctrines which seem most insisted 
on, those of the parousia and of Antichrist, are no 
exception to this, for even on these two points the 
apostle does not enter into any theoretical discussion ; 
it is a practical end which he has in view (1 Thess. 
iv. 13). This is why some have been led to speak 
of the dogmatic indifference, or neutrality, of these 
letters, — terms which are both alike inappropriate, 
and give an utterly misleading impression of the 
specific character of these brief pages. There is 
nothing tame about them, nothing vague or in- 
definite ; on the contrary, they breathe a spirit of 
strong faith and overflowing life, and above all, an 
ardour of hope destined before long to be extin- 
guished. 1 They give a first sketch of Paul's doctrine, 

1 \Subdued, or chastened, we admit ; but not " extinguished." 
On p. 1 1 1 this hope is spoken of as " transformed." Paul never 



no THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

corresponding with that primitive period when it pos- 
sessed all its vigour without having as yet attained its 
fulness. Let us note some of its special features : 

I. The anti-Judaistic controversy which char- 
acterizes the great epistles has not broken out, or 
at any rate has not as yet absorbed the apostle's 
attention. It is entirely absent from these two 
letters. The contention which they bespeak is of a 
general character ; it is the warfare that the great 
missionary waged against both Jews and pagans, 
the same that is found in his discourses in the Acts 
(i Thess. ii. 14-16). The aroiroi kol irovrjpol avOpcoiroi 
spoken of in 2 Thessalonians iii. 2 are not Judaeo- 
Christians, but Jews who are impeding Paul's work 
at Corinth. Again, it is to the calumnies of the 
Jews of Thesssalonica, or elsewhere, that the personal 
defence in the second chapter of the first epistle 
refers. There is no need for us to see in this an 
artificial imitation of passages in 1 and 2 Corinthians, 
such as Baur discovers. The apostle is not so much 
endeavouring to defend himself, as to present his 
own laborious and disinterested life for an example 
to the Church at Thessalonica (chap. ii. 9-12). 

2. The great Pauline antithesis between the law 
and faith, having no existence as yet in these two 
epistles, we are not surprised to find that the doc- 
trine of Justification remains undeveloped and is 
presented there under a very general form. It is 

ceased to look forward ardently to the parousia ; though at a 
later time the event seemed less imminent, and death came 
between him and this glorious prospect. See Rom. viii. 18, 19 
(comp. 1 Cor. i. 7); Col. iii. 4 ; Phil. iii. 20, 21, — to say nothing 
of the letters to Timothy and. Titus. See further, on this point, 
P. 379-] 



PA UVS MISSION AR V PRE A CUING. 1 1 1 

the same with the doctrine of Redemption, which 
is unquestionably connected with the death of Jesus 
(i Thess. v. 10), but in a decidedly external fashion, 
not otherwise than in the missionary discourses. The 
death and resurrection of Christ are placed side by 
side, but their inner logical connexion, their redemp- 
tive and moral significance are not brought to light. 

3. While the apostle's Soteriology is scarcely de- 
veloped, his Messianic Eschatology, on the contrary, 
holds an important place in these letters. This is 
in fact their characteristic element, and gives them 
their peculiar originality. In the following epistles it 
will be gradually transformed, yielding to Soteriology 
the place of honour which it occupies here. At the 
same time it furnishes another essential and notable 
feature of resemblance between these two earliest 
epistles and the discourses of the Acts (chap. xvii. 
7, 31). Paul as yet had not advanced far beyond 
the general type of apostolic preaching. 

The epistles to the Thessalonians, it is evident, 
resemble the missionary discourses in what they leave 
out, as well as in the special points on which they 
dwell. Certainly there is a wide distance between 
these vivid pages and the pale reproduction given 
us in the Acts ; but nevertheless we stand, here and 
there, on the same ground. At the basis of the two 
epistles and of the discourses analysed above there 
lies one and the same type of doctrine, which gives 
its character to this first stage of Paul's theology. 
This we must endeavour to extract and define more 
clearly. 



CHAPTER II. 

PRIMITIVE PAULINISM. 

PAUL'S doctrine in its primitive type is quite 
simple, and was organized in an elementary 
fashion. Its ideas are still general, and their logical 
connexion is not always apparent. They may be 
completely summed up under these two heads : the 
Gospel message, and the parous ia. 



THE GOSPEL (evayyiXiov tov Beov). 

In common with Jesus and the Twelve, Paul 
designates by the name of the gospel the message 
of salvation that he bears to Jews and Gentiles. It 
is the gospel of God, because it is God who sends it 
and who is the Author of it (i Thess. ii. 2, 8, 9) ; or 
again, the word of God, ^070? tov Seov (1 Thess. ii. 
13 ; Acts xiii. 46). It is the gospel of Christ, be- 
cause Christ is its essential content (1 Thess. iii. 2 ; 
2 Thess. i. 8). Again, Paul, calls it our gospel (Sea 
rod evayye\iov rj/ncov, 2 Thess. ii. 14). This expres- 
sion, however, has not as yet the particular shade 
of meaning that it afterwards acquired in the dis- 
cussion with the Judaizers (to evayyeXiov /aov, Rom. 
ii. 16). Lastly, salvation being the end of this 



PRIMITIVE PAULINISM. 113 

Gospel, it is further called X070? 7% acoTrjpias 
(Acts xiii. 26 and 1 Thess. ii. 16). 

There can be no question of the Messianic char- 
acter of the apostle's early preaching. This consti- 
tuted for those times precisely what we should now 
call the religious point of view. The apostle of the 
Gentiles began, like the rest, by preaching the near 
approach of the judgment of God and describing "the 
wrath to come," in the fashion of John the Baptist 
(opyijp epyo\xkv^v, I Thess. i. 10 ; 2 Thess. i. 8, 9 ; Acts 
xvii. 31). He called men to repentance, and to faith 
in Jesus, by whom the world was to be judged, and 
by whom they might be saved: "God, overlooking the 
times of ignorance, now requires that repentance be 
proclaimed to all men ; for He has fixed a day for 
judging the world in righteousness by the man Jesus, 
whom He has chosen, having raised Him from the 
dead" (comp. Rom. ii. 16). 

At the same time, Paul proved that the promises 
were realized and the prophecies fulfilled in Jesus the 
Messiah (6 X/ko-to?). This Messiah is far more than 
the heir of David ; He is the Son of God, — the Lord 
(6 Kvpios). This last name, as we know, is the one 
by which the apostle preferred to designate Jesus. 
It even became in his epistles the proper name of 
Christ (comp. 1 Cor. viii. 6). It implies an absolute 
sovereignty over man's conscience, over the Church, 
and the historical development of the world. In the 
Septuagint, 6 Kvpio? is specially applied to Jehovah. 
This name, when given to Jesus, is in itself an inti- 
mation that He has become to the Christian con- 
sciousness that which Jehovah was to the prophetical 
consciousness. So the day of Jehovah becomes the 
day of the Lord Jesus (1 Thess. v. 2 ; 2 Thess. ii. 2). 

8 



U4 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

In some few passages it is difficult to see whether 
Kvpios designates God or Christ. On the other hand, 
it is in Jesus the Son of God that the Fatherhood of 
God with regard to men is revealed and realized. 
Hence the formulae, eV Seep wttrpl koX Kvptco Irjaov 
Xpi(TT(p, @eo? irarrjp tj/jlcjv koX Kvplov ^Ir}aov Xpiarov 
(i Thess. i. I ; 2 Thess. i. 2), which continue to be 
characteristic of all Paul's letters. 

But so far we have only touched on the more 
external aspect of the apostle's doctrine, and that 
which least distinguished it from the preaching of 
the Twelve. Underneath these general forms an 
intense spiritual life, singularly original in its nature, 
was all the while developing itself, which had been 
called into being on the very day of Paul's conversion, 
and was speedily in its turn to give birth to a rich 
and unique system of dogmatics. We must never 
forget that with Paul, in truth, experience preceded 
system and feeling theory. What is really Pauline 
in these two epistles is the spiritual inspiration which 
pervades them. If we do not find here the same 
kind of reasoning as in the epistle to the Romans, we 
have the same modes of thought and sentiment, the 
same moral experience, and the same specific type 
of Christian life, which has indeed attained already 
in the soul of the apostle a richness and sublimity 
that compel our admiration. We find in every phrase 
that full-charged feeling and moral weight, and that 
profound intuition of spiritual things which charac- 
terize the style of his great epistles. 

The fruitful source of this new life is the great idea 
of grace (%«pt? tov ©eou y 2 Thess. i. 12). This grace, 
actuated by the Father's eternal love, is historically 
manifested and fulfilled in Christ, and is also called 



PRIMITIVE PAULWISM. 115 



the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thess. v. 28). It 
is the fundamental principle of the vocation (kXtjo-ls) 
and election {e/cXoyrj) of believers (1 Thess. ii. 12, 
i. 4). Through it we are not only called, but also 
predestinated to salvation and to life, ovic tdero fjnas 
6 (9eo? els opyrjv dWa et? irepLiroirjaiV (TCDTrjpia? (i 
Thess. v. 9 ; comp. Acts xiii. 48). These are the earliest 
traces of the doctrine of predestination. The effect 
produced on men's minds by the apostle's preach- 
ing did not seem to him fortuitous. In the unbelief 
of some, and the faith of others, he saw from the first 
the consequence of a fixed determination of God 
(2 Thess. ii. 13, 14; comp. Rom. viii. 30). 

But we must not conceive of this grace as external 
to man, as though it were an arbitrary gift, a donum 
superadditum. It is an active force (Suva/Ms), whose 
immanence is its essential characteristic, — a regene- 
rative power working by faith from within out- 
wardly. Hence the Gospel preaching proves to be 
no mere succession of empty words, but a Divine 
energy taking possession of the soul of the believer 
in order to renew it {Xoyo^ Qeov, 09 real evepyelrai, iv 
vfuv tols Triarevovaiv, i Thess. ii. 13 ; i. 5). The essen- 
tial medium of this power of salvation is Jesus Christ, 
in whom we live and who lives in us through faith. 
The Christian life is thus an organic creation, having- 
its root in the virtue of Jesus Himself, and attaining 
its development and completion in the glory of the 
Saviour (1 Thess. v. 9, 10 ; 2 Thess. ii. 13, 14). Those 
who are dead in Christ {ol ve/cpol iv Xpio-ro)) are not 
lost ; Christ, in whom they have their principle of 
life, will raise them up. Let us mark well this moral 
dynamic ; it will gradually transform the Jewish 



1*6 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

eschatology which Paul inherited, and which so far 
he has done little more than reproduce. 

Lastly, this whole Christian life, in its essential 
principle, its permanent character, and glorious end, 
has already found expression in the three virtues 
which gather up and exhaust it : faith, love, hope 
{jxvr\ixov€vovT£<; v/jlo)v tov epyou tt}? 7r:crT£ft)? Kai rod 
koitov tt}? ayaTTT]*; /cal tt)? tnTO/uLOvrjs ty}? i\iriSo<;, I 
Thess. i. 3; comp. v. 8; 2 Thess. i. 3, 4, n; ii. 13, 16 ; 
iii. 5). The work of faith is that profound change 
by which the Thessalonians turned from the vain 
worship of idols to strve the living God, and were 
consecrated to Jesus Christ (eV dyiaajiw HvevfiaTos teal 
7riaT€i akrjOelas, 2 Thess. ii. 13). By this consecration 
they were separated from heathenism and snatched 
from all its defilements ; and they must carry it out 
in their whole life and being, by the entire sanctifica- 
tion of spirit, soul, and body {dyidaai v/ia? 6\ore\eU, 
1 Thess. v. 23). But this destruction of the old 
nature is the consequence of the new life in them, 
the essence and strength of which is love. The first 
duty of Christians is mutual love among themselves 
(2 Thess. i. 3). This mutual love is the love of 
brethren, for all Christians form one family (1 Thess. 
iv. 9). It should further extend itself to all men (et? 
a\Xr;Xou9 /cal et? irdvTa?, I Thess. iii. 12). Christians 
must not return evil for evil ; according to God's ex- 
ample of love, they must seek the good of all (1 Thess. 
v. 15 ; 2 Thess. iii. 5). It is this holy labour of love, 
which spends and wearies itself in service and self- 
sacrifice, that Paul describes in the energetic phrase 
/co7ro? T97? dyuTrrj^. After faith and love comes hope, 
a constant source of joy and consolation, even in the 
midst of the darkest and severest trials. Hope begets 



PRIMITIVE PAULINISM. 117 

patience. Rooted in Jesus Christ, Christians are 
enabled to stand firm in Him, awaiting His speedy 
coming (o-Tr/A^re eV Kvplw, 1 Thess. iii. 8). 

Thus the apostle's thought, starting from eschato- 
logy, returns to it and there reaches its goal. The 
Messianic ideas, in short, here come both first and 
last ; they supply not indeed the vital principle, but 
the external framework of this early Paulinism. We 
must now examine them more directly. 

II. ESCHATOLOGY. 

It is an apocalypse in brief which these two epistles 
set before us. The great apostasy, the appearance of 
the man of sin, or Antichrist, the advent and victory 
of the Lord, the resurrection and the judgment — 
such are the successive scenes of this great drama. 
Underneath the differences of detail we feel the pro- 
found analogy of this eschatology to that of John. 
Fundamentally, Christian eschatology in the apostolic 
times followed a regular course of development. It 
is not so richly unfolded here as in the Apocalypse, 
but much more definitely than in the discourses of 
Jesus ; it is at an intermediate stage between these 
two extreme points of its history. 

The apostle Paul has referred no part of his teach- 
ing to that of Jesus more expressly than his escha- 
tological doctrine. What he says on this point is 
taught, he assures us, eV Xoyrn Kvpi'ov (1 Thess. iv. 15). 
Indeed, we may certainly recognise in the first verses 
of the fifth chapter a faithful reproduction of some 
of the Master's words. Jesus Himself had also 
spoken of the outburst of evil in the last days, of the 
apostasy of a great number of believers, and of the 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



appearance of false Christs and false prophets. He 
had, in like manner, maintained a very sober reserve 
respecting the time and hour of the Parousia, simply 
comparing its sudden coming to that of a thief in 
the night. He too had spoken of the resurrection, 
of the assembling of all the faithful with the Son of 
man, and of the final judgment which will render 
unto every man according to his works. Only, in 
the teaching of Jesus there is found, under the most 
material images borrowed from Jewish apocalyptics, 
an indefinable inner spirituality, which gives them 
breadth and freedom, and invests these pictures with a 
symbolical import. In the apostolic preaching, on the 
contrary, these ideas become set and rigid, and they 
fall into a systematic order and scheme. It could 
not be otherwise. The work of systematization was 
carried on under the constant influence of the Book 
of Daniel, traces of which are easily to be discerned 
in the Gospel of Matthew, the epistles to the Thessa- 
lonians, and the Apocalypse of John (2 Thess. ii. 4 ; 
comp. Dan. xi. 36). 

The end of the world will be brought about by 
God's direct intervention. But the moment of this 
intervention has not been arbitrarily chosen. It 
depends upon the historical development of the forces 
at work in the world. And for that reason this time 
may, to some extent, be foreseen and calculated. 
Such is the fundamental idea of the Jewish Apo- 
calypse. The first catastrophe is to be a judgment, 
a condemnation of the power of evil. That which 
precedes and prepares for it, therefore, is the growth 
of this power to its culmination and full maturity. 
The world, in fact, must become ripe for destruction, 
the sins of the fathers and children uniting to fill up 



PRIMITIVE PAULINISM. 119 

their measure (Matt, xxiii. 32; 1 Thess. ii. 16). That 
is what Jesus taught, and His disciples also. In like 
manner, Paul expressly declares that the end cannot 
come until evil has attained its final manifestation 

(r) aTTOCTTCKJia TTptoTOV, 2 TllCSS. ii. 3). 

This power of evil at work in the world is as yet 
in a state of secret ferment, of mystery (to fJLvarrjpiov 
tt)<? avo/xta?, 2 Thess. ii. 7). But it will break forth 
violently, incarnated in a personality who will serve 
as its medium, — the man of sin, the sou of perdition 
(6 av6pco7ro<; tt}? d/naprias, 6 vib$ t?}? airwXela^). This 
personage will be in the order of evil what the person 
of Christ is in the order of good. He is, therefore, 
the evil and anti-divine principle in its ultimate reve- 
lation. As God came into the world in the person 
of the Messiah, Antichrist will appear as the radical 
and absolute negation not only of Christ, but of God 
Himself. He will set Himself above everything 
Divine, and will make His throne in the temple and 
cause Himself to be worshipped as God (2 Thess. ii. 4). 

Whence will this head of the powers of evil arise ? 
The general answer is, From the midst of heathenism ; 
so the epithet civo/io? (ver. 8) might lead us to think. 
But this adjective is used here in an absolute sense ; 
it is not the man without law, but the man who 
knowingly tramples on the law, who is the conscious 
negation of the law, because he is the negation of 
good. The two epistles to the Thessalonians, as a 
whole, lead us to suppose that in Paul's view the 
Antichrist who will enthrone himself as God in the 
temple of Jerusalem itself in place of the true Messiah, 
is to arise out of Judaism. Did not the Jewish 
people already embody for him the fiercest possible 
opposition to the Gospel ? Those avOpwirot cltotvoi 



120 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

fcai irovTjpol of whom the apostle complains, were 
they not Jews (2 Thess. iii. 2) ? x-\nd, finally, is it 
not the Jews whom Paul describes as hostile to the 
human race, constantly multiplying their sins, filling 
up the measure of their iniquities, and ready for 
destruction by the Divine wrath (1 Thess. ii. 15, 16)? 
Antichrist, therefore, is not Nero, nor any other 
Roman Emperor ; he is the representative of the 
Jewish revolution, which was already at work. The 
power that represses it and prevents its outburst, the 
/carexwv, is the Roman government which maintains 
order. Was it not this which saved Paul at Corinth, 
and which had everywhere saved him from the machi- 
nations of the Jews ? When this barrier is removed 
and the ideal power of evil, already active in Judaism, 
shall have triumphed and in its transgressions far 
surpassed heathen idolatry (2 Thess. ii. 4) — when the 
king of evil has come — then the world will be ripe for 
judgment. 1 



1 A renewed examination of these passages now renders us 
less confident of the Jewish character of the Antichrist spoken 
of in this much controverted passage. The apostasy in question 
seems to extend* far beyond the limits of Judaism, and to be the 
outcome of a general and hopeless revolt of the whole world 
against God and the order established by Him. In Daniel xi. 
36, the passage alluded to by Paul, the king who blasphemes 
and sets himself above every god, becoming the symbol of 
Antichrist, is a heathen king ; it is Antiochus Epiphanes. 
But that is no reason why, in Paul's belief, the uj/ri/<ei/xei/os of 
2 Thess. ii. 4 should be a Roman emperor. In assuming 
a deeper moral and religious significance, the type has lost 
much of its political character. The author of the epistle, as 
it seems to us, abides by the prediction of Daniel, and leaves 
the personality of Antichrist indefinite, precisely because this 
personality did not as yet present a distinct form to his eyes. 



PRIMITIVE PAULINISM. 



Thus the parousia of Antichrist is to precede and 
prepare for the parousia of the Lord. The latter 
will be a splendid and decisive triumph over the 
adversary. At a signal given by God, Christ will 

What he asserts at the time of his writing is the existence 
of a wide and powerful leaven of evil, which will afterward 
have its incarnation in an individual, according to the terms ot 
Daniel's prophecy, but which at present works in an impersonal 
form. Hence the general expression, to p.vo-Trjpiov eVepyeirat 
777s dvojLttas (ver. 7). 

The point which it seems essential for us to maintain is that 
the author, in any case, clearly distinguishes the Roman Empire 
and Emperor from the personality of the Antichrist and the 
part which he plays. Indeed the Emperor is regarded as the 
KaTe'xwv, and the Empire as to Karexov {neuter) ; i.e., as the power 
of order and justice which as yet checks the outbreak of evil, 
and delays the disclosure of the mystery of iniquity in the per- 
sonality of Antichrist and in the world-wide apostasy. 

At a later time this distinction between the Roman Emperor 
and Empire on the one hand, and Antichrist on the other, 
disappeared ; and not only that, but Rome itself became the 
mystery of iniquity, and the Emperor in person figures as the 
Beast in the Apocalypse (Rev. xiii., xvii. ; comp. 1 Pet. v. 13). 
This identification of the powers that we here find contrasted, 
took place after the year 64 and in the person of Nero. But 
in the second letter to the Christians of Thessalonica, the Empire 
and Emperor are still regarded as the beneficent and protecting 
powers of social order. Indeed, Paul here entertains exactly 
the same views and opinions on this subject to which he gives 
expression in the epistle to the Romans, chap. xiii. 1-6 : wcttc 
6 av-LTao-o-6/Atvos rrj i^ovaut, rfj rov ®eov Siarayfj av8£o~T7]Kev 
ol yap apyovTcs ovk etcrc cfi6/3os t<Z aya6<2 f'pyw, dAAa 
to) Ka/co3 . . . ov yap uktj ttjv fxa^aipav <fiopei' ©eov yap 
SiaKOvos ecmr, ckSikos eis opy?/v ra) to KaK.bv 7rpacro-ovTt. 

To our mind this correspondence is a decisive proof that this 
much-disputed second epistle to the Thessalonians was written 
before the year 64, and is consequently of Pauline origin. — Note 
written by the author for this edition. 



122 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

descend from heaven with His mighty angels, as He 
has Himself announced. The day of the Parousia 
is uncertain and unknown ; but as Jesus had appa- 
rently said that it would come before the generation 
then present had passed away, and that men should 
watch for it constantly, Paul, like the other apostles 
and all the early Christians, hopes to be still living 
at the time ( i Thess. iv. 15-17). We may observe, 
n passing, that this declaration would be very strange 
if these two epistles to the Thessalonians had been 
composed after the apostle's death ; since the forgery 
would have credited Paul, gratuitously, with a hope 
that was obviously falsified. 

The Christians who have died will rise first, and 
join those who are still alive ; together they will be 
caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord descend- 
ing from heaven, and will be for ever with the Lord. 
But this day of the Lord is at the same time the 
day of judgment. The destruction of Antichrist is 
nothing less than the first act of this judgment, which 
will also bring about the eternal ruin (oXetfpos aloovtos, 
2 Thess. i. 8-10) of all the ungodly. 

We meet with this eschatological doctrine once 
more in the first epistle to the Corinthians, wanting 
only the figure of the Antichrist. But it is already 
in course of transformation under the influence of the 
principle of the Pauline gospel, which as it unfolded 
itself, could not possibly remain confined within the 
very narrow lines of the Jewish Apocalypse. The 
description of 1 Corinthians xv. 15-52, which by its 
very phraseology so plainly recalls 1 Thessalonians iv. 
16, is, however, sufficient proof that the eschatological 
hopes which we have just set forth were an essential 
feature in the earlier phase of the Pauline doctrine. 



PRIMIT1 VE PA UL1NISM. 



Such then, for the present, is this early type of 
Paulinism, — still closely allied in its general concep- 
tion to the preaching of the other apostles, but bearing 
within it already the new and bold ideas to which 
subsequently it gave birth. It is admirably calculated 
to serve as a transition, and means of organic con- 
nexion, between the apostolic preaching with which 
Paul set out and the independent conception of the 
Gospel to which he afterwards attained. We shall 
now see the true Paulinism take shape, under the 
double pressure of the inner logic of its own prin- 
ciples and of the external opposition of the Judaizing 
party, which proved a still more effectual stimulus. 



CHAPTER III. 

FIRST CONFLICTS WITH THE JUDAIZING CHRIS- 
TIANS. — THE TIME OF CRISIS AND TRANSITION 
(Acts xv. ; Galatians ii.). 

IN order to understand the struggle which is about 
to begin, we must revert to the apostle's conver- 
sion, and note carefully the new course into which it 
directed his mind and his life. 

The conversion of Paul had been, in point of fact, a 
radical negation of the Jewish principle. His apostle- 
ship to the Gentiles was its logical consequence ; 
and this mission, pursued with equal boldness and 
success, was the practical realization of the kingdom 
of God beyond the sacred limits of the Jewish people. 
If during this first missionary period Paul does not 
attack the authority of the law in theory, he com- 
pletely ignores it in fact, and carries on his work 
without the least reference to it. The very name of 
the law is not to be found in the two epistles to the 
Thessalonians. Through the unexpected progress 
of his work, the contradiction of Judaism implied in 
the apostle's faith passed from this inner sphere into 
the general life of the Church ; it expressed itself 
in actual facts, previously to its being dogmatically 
formulated. 

Meanwhile the Jewish principle on its part, con- 



THE CONFLICT WITH THE JUDA1ZERS. 125 



quered and negatived as it was in the soul of the 
apostle to the Gentiles and in his ministry, revived 
in the Jewish Churches of Palestine in a vigorous and 
obstinate form. It was not to be expected that the 
old principle would yield to the new without conflict 
The astonishing success of the mission to the Gentiles 
caused, no doubt, more embarrassment than pleasure 
at Jerusalem. The old Judaism felt that its venerable 
claims were in jeopardy ; and it could not maintain 
and defend them without endeavouring to enforce 
them on others. 

Let us define clearly the great question which now 
arises. It is not as to whether Gentiles shall be 
admitted into the kingdom of God : on that point 
every one was agreed. The question was, On what 
terms were they to be admitted ? Was it necessary 
to become a Jew in order to be a Christian ? Must 
one pass through Judaism to reach the Gospel ? This 
was the point at issue. Those who upheld the eternal 
claims of the old religion would, of necessity, impose 
circumcision on the Gentiles ; for it was only through 
circumcision that they could be materially incorpo- 
rated with the elect people, and become members of 
the family of Abraham. Accordingly, it was over 
circumcision that the great battle came to be fought. 

No wonder that it was long and fierce. Christianity 
and Judaism were now contending for their existence. 
If the Gentiles enter the Church directly, and there 
obtain through faith alone the same rank and privi- 
leges as the Jews, what becomes of the rights of 
Israel ? what advantage has the elect people over 
other nations ? Is not this utterly to deny the abso- 
lute validity of Judaism ? On the other hand, if 
circumcision be imposed on the Gentile converts, is 



126 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

not that in itself a declaration that faith in Christ is 
insufficient for salvation ? Does it not reduce the 
Gospel to the position of a mere accessory to Mosaism? 
Is not this to deny the absolute validity of the work 
of Jesus Christ? 

Such was the fundamental question that Paul's 
missionary successes raised amongst the Judaean 
Churches. It could not fail to create a profound 
division of opinion. Up to this time Christianity 
and Judaism had marched hand in hand. But now 
a choice must be made. The Christian Jews, who 
belonged more to Moses than to Jesus (and there 
were many such), were prepared without hesitation 
to stand forward as the ardent champions of 
threatened Judaism. Paul, on the other hand, natu- 
rally became the apostle of Christian freedom. To 
defend the independence of the Gospel was to defend 
his own work, his apostleship, his faith, his conversion. 
This great cause became his personal cause. Betwixt 
the two parties, the Twelve are eclipsed. They appear 
full of anxiety and hesitation, seeking for a reconcilia- 
tion between the two hostile principles, which could 
not be other than precarious. 

The first conflict seems to have taken place upon 
Paul's return from his first missionary journey. Cer- 
tain Pharisaic Christians, who had come down from 
Judaea to Antioch, sought to impose circumcision on 
the Gentile converts. " If you do not submit to 
circumcision," they said, " you cannot be saved " 
(Acts xv. i). They alleged the authority of the 
Twelve in support of their claims. Great was the 
disturbance they excited, and violent the dispute. 
Paul did not underestimate the gravity of the 
struggle then beginning. The triumph of these new 



THE CONFLICT WITH THE JUDA1ZERS. 127 

missionaries compromised his whole work ; and he 
was keenly distressed. He could not tell what were, 
at the bottom, the real sentiments of the apostles 
at Jerusalem. He feared that a scandalous rupture 
would be caused. The right course to pursue was 
made plain to him by a revelation, — by a decisive 
illumination, an inspiration full of assurance and 
strength, following an interval of hesitation and inner 
conflict (Gal. ii. 2). He will go up to Jerusalem with 
Barnabas, and set forth his gospel to those who are 
accounted pillars in the Church ; he will rehearse the 
triumphs that have been won, and the hopes that are 
entertained And he will find means, if it prove neces- 
sary, to persuade or win them over to support him. 
They will be compelled to endorse his work, and 
protect it from the attacks of the intruders. In any 
case, he will deprive them of that authority from 
the apostles from which they draw their credit and 
strength (Gal. ii. 1-3). 

In these hopes Paul was not deceived. The essen- 
tial end he sought was gained. The revelation he 
had received, and upon which he acted, had not 
misled him. The Twelve in no wise supported the 
pretensions of the false brethren. Titus was not 
compelled to be circumcised. The authorities of the 
Church gave Paul's gospel their unreserved approval, 
and did not propose to add anything to it. They 
acknowledged the legitimacy of his apostleship, and 
gave him the right hand of fellowship ; so that they 
might labour together in the work of God, the one 
party among the Gentiles and the other among the 
Jews. They even requested Paul and Barnabas to 
bear in mind the poor of Jerusalem, and to interest 
the new Gentile Christian Churches on their behalf. 



128 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

At the same time, the Twelve could not share either 
in the boldness or confidence of Paul. They had 
other hopes, and judged things from a totally different 
standpoint. The Gospel might, indeed, have a partial, 
and more or less brilliant success among the Gentiles ; 
but, in their eyes, this was quite a secondary matter. 
The main and chiefly important work was the con- 
version of the Jewish people, who were to be the first 
to enter, as a nation, into the new covenant ; then the 
turn of the Gentiles would come. Therefore they 
must not scandalize the Jews, nor break with Judaism. 
The part played by the apostles in these keen de- 
bates was, and could only be, that of conciliation. 
All their efforts were directed to bring about through 
these deliberations such a compromise as would pre- 
serve unity among all divisions in the Church, without 
placing the new evangelical principle in peril. Hence 
the equivocal position in which they were found 
throughout, and the minor part they played in the 
history of these great struggles. 1 

The Acts of the Apostles has preserved for us the 
material result of these conferences in the form of a 
letter addressed by the Church at Jerusalem to the 
new Gentile Christian Churches, for the purpose of 
re-assuring and pacifying them. Their freedom is 
recognised. The letter is no more than a recom- 
mendation of observances such as Paul himself en- 
joined and the Churches already practised ; viz. 
abstinence from meat sacrificed to idols, from blood, 

1 See an excellent estimate of the part taken by the Twelve 
in L ) Histoire de la theologie aftostolique of M. Reuss, vol. i., pp. 
306-329 [Eng. trans., i., 263-283] ; de Pressense, Histoire des 
trois pre?niers szecles, vol. i., pp. 457-474 [Eng. trans., The 
Apostolic Age, pp. 125-141]. 



THE CONFLICT WITH THE JUDAIZERS. 129 

from things strangled, — and lastly, from fornication. 
In other words, they were to continue within those 
general limits under which the Jews received prose- 
lytes into social communion with themselves. These 
restrictions occur again in Paul's epistles to the 
Corinthians, and in the Apocalypse. While it is 
certain that the two parties at Jerusalem came at 
last to an understanding, it is equally certain that 
this agreement could not have been arrived at in 
any other way or upon any other basis. 

This solution, it must however be said, was really 
no solution at all. It might have some effect in the 
sphere of practical life ; but it left the question of 
principle untouched. The truth is, that from this 
time it was no longer possible to arrest the conflict 
between the Christian and the Jewish principle. The 
apostles at Jerusalem showed their tact and wisdom, 
as well as their moderation, in not entering upon it. 
Time alone could bring it to an issue. It was the 
dawn of a religious revolution, whose course it was 
useless to resist. So far from preventing it, the 
debates and resolutions of the council at Jerusalem 
served only to precipitate the struggle. The compro- 
mise then agreed upon became the starting point and 
occasion of still fiercer and more serious contest. The 
two hostile parties might each, indeed, regard it as a 
first victory. It was an obvious inference for Paul 
to conclude from it that the Gospel has abolished 
the Law for Jews as well as Gentiles. But on the 
other hapd, his adversaries gained an equal advan- 
tage. It was well understood that the decision of the 
council only affected the Gentiles ; and that the Law 
remained obligatory for the Jews who continued to 
form the nucleus of the Church, the Messianic com- 

9 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



munity. In relation to the Jewish Church, therefore, 
Gentile Christians held an inferior position. They 
purchased their liberty at the cost of their privileges. 
They became fat proselytes of the gate of Christianity; 
they remained, in fact, at the door of the kingdom. 
Thus the Judaizers had, seemingly, an equal right to 
claim the settlement made at Jerusalem as a first 
success. It furnished them with an excellent vantage 
ground for a new campaign. They were inevitably 
tempted to turn these proselytes of the gate into 
proselytes of righteousness . This persistent antagonism 
soon declared itself in the event. 

A second contest, still more serious than that at 
Jerusalem, broke out at Antioch (Gal. ii. 13, ff.). 
This event, as we have seen [pp. 10, 11], finds its 
proper occasion on Paul's return from his second 
journey, at the end of the first and the beginning of 
the second period of our history. 

In the vigorous discourse addressed to the Judaizers 
and summed up in the epistle to the Galatians, the 
full-grown Paul for the first time displays himself, 
with his great thesis of justification by faith, his 
radical negation of the law, and the irresistible logic 
of his polemics. The crisis now reaches its height. 

Peter on coming to Antioch had eaten with Gen- 
tile Christians, without regard to the precepts of the 
law, which were in danger of being cast aside by the 
Jewish Christians themselves. But just then certain 
emissaries of James arrived, who protested against this 
apostasy and asserted the authority of the law. Peter 
was unable to withstand their influence. After having 
sanctioned Christian liberty by his example, he seemed 
to condemn it. He withdrew, and separated himself 
from the Gentile Christians in order to make common 



THE CONFLICT WITH THE JUDAIZERS. 131 



cause with those of the circumcision. Many other 
Christians, and Barnabas himself, were drawn into 
this *act of hypocrisy ; and there was a temporary 
revival of zeal for Judaism. Paul remained firm 
and faithful. " Seeing," he says, " that they walked 
not with straight foot according to the truth of 
the Gospel, I said to Peter before them all, If thou, 
being a Jew, livest like a Gentile, why dost thou 
compel the Gentiles to Judaize? " The inconsistency 
of Peter's double conduct could not be better shown. 
But Paul does not stop there ; his argument goes to 
the root of the matter. This flagrant inconsistency 
of behaviour arose from an inner, though perhaps 
unconscious inconsistency, which was at the bottom 
of the doctrine of the Judaizing Christians, and which 
Paul's pitiless logic lays bare in the discourse which 
follows this apostrophe. All equivocation is cut short. 
This is the overwhelming dilemma to which Peter is 
shut up : Either faith in Christ is sufficient in itself 
— in that case, why ask anything more from the 
Gentiles, why glory in anything besides ? — or else it 
is not sufficient ; but if not, it is not really necessary, — 
and we Jews were mistaken in despairing of salvation 
through the law and in having recourse to faith and 
the death of Christ. In this case, His death was 
superfluous and useless ! The whole discourse centres 
in this dilemma. 

Paul, from the first, puts himself in the position 
of the Jewish Christians (^/-tet? (frvcret, 'lovhalou) ; he 
aims at showing the radical contradiction existing, 
unawares to them, between their professed faith in 
Christ and the Jewish claims that they seek to im- 
pose on others. " We, who are Jews by origin and 
not Gentile sinners ^afiaprcoXol), being convinced that 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



man cannot be justified by the law, if he continue a 
stranger to faith in Christ, — we, I say, have also be- 
lieved in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by 
faith, and not by the works of the law. What does 
this mean, if not that our conversion to Christ is with 
us Jews an undoubted proof that the essential means 
of justification lies not in the law, but in faith ? For 
we have only believed in Christ, after despairing of 
the law. It is true then to affirm that in our view 
also no flesh can be justified before God by the law." 
It is thus that Paul was led, in conflict with the 
Judaistic opposition, to the full development and 
definition of the grand thesis of his theology, — viz. 
justification by faith ; and to apply it to Jews and 
Gentiles alike, without making any distinction. He 
asserts and logically deduces the consequences of the 
fundamental principle he has now arrived at. "In the 
work of our justification, faith in Christ is therefore 
substituted for the works of the law. In seeking to 
be justified through Christ, we acknowledge, by that 
very act, that the law is ineffectual to this end. 
Faith in Christ, therefore, implies the negation of the 
law for all." 

In the seventeenth verse the objection is raised, 
which Paul's teaching has ever since continued to 
provoke. The suppression of the law will reduce the 
Jews to the rank of the a/iaprcoXo), the Gentiles. Sin 
will no longer be restrained ; and if Jesus abolishes 
the law, He becomes the servant, the minister of sin 
(comp. Rom. vi. i). Paul is not content to reject this 
conclusion, as he does, by an energetic firj jevotTo. 
, " So far from that," he exclaims, " it results, on the 
contrary, that if I build up again the law which I 
removed in coming to Christ, I am not only incon- 



THE C0NFL1C1 WITH THE JUDAIZERS. 



sistent with myself, but I lose what I have gained ; 
in face of the law thus restored, I find, and indeed 
constitute myself, a transgressor ! Of necessity, trans- 
gression is revived along with the law ; and the death 
of Christ is rendered vain. But on the contrary, 
where there is no law, there is also no transgression. 
The truth is, that through the law I died to the law. 
I have been crucified and condemned by the law with 
Christ ; I am therefore freed from the law. It is no 
longer I that live, it is Christ who lives in me ; and 
that life which I still live in the flesh, I live not 
under the law, but by faith in the Son of God, who 
has loved me and given Himself for me." Finally, 
gathering up this profound and powerful argument 
into a single sentence, he declares, " If righteousness 
comes to us by any kind of law, Christ died for 
nothing ! " 

Thus understood, the discourse which Paul has con- 
densed in this brief abstract is really the complete 
programme developed in the great epistles. It not 
only contains all the essential ideas of the Pauline 
theology, but they are presented already in the same 
logical order in which we shall find them in the epistle 
to the Romans : the inability of born Jews and of 
sinners among the Gentiles alike to justify themselves 
by their works ; the necessity, identical for both 
parties, of believing in Christ ; the opposition between 
justification by faith and justification by law ; the 
abolishment of the law through faith ; the conception 
of redemption as a death to the law and a resurrection 
with Christ, resulting in the glorious liberty of the 
children of God — all the links in this golden chain 
are found here in their organic connexion. The 
principle implanted in Paul's mind on his conversion 



134 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



at last yields its full result. The germ has become 
a mighty tree. We have passed through the first 
period of Paul's life ; and we enter forthwith on the 



great conflicts of the second. 



BOOK III. 

SECOND PERIOD ; OR, THE PERIOD OF 
THE GREAT CONFLICTS. 

From 53 to 58 A.D. 

THE discussion which took place at Antioch 
seems to have been a regular declaration of war. 
From this hour the struggle became general, and was 
carried out on both sides without truce or restraint. 
The Judaizing opposition, originating in Palestine, 
extends and breaks out everywhere ; we find it dis- 
turbing Galatia, Ephesus, and the Church at Corinth 
by turns ; and outrunning the apostle of the Gentiles 
himself, it gets to Rome before him. The judaizing 
party had its missionaries, who followed in. Paul's 
track, and in every place strove with embittered zeal 
to undermine his authority, to seduce his disciples, 
and to destroy his work under the pretence of rectify- 
ing it. It was a counter-mission systematically 
organized. The delegates arrived with letters of 
recommendation, and gave themselves out as repre- 
sentatives of the Twelve, denying Paul's apostleship 
and sowing distrust and suspicion of him everywhere 
by their odious calumnies. 

With the apostle this was a time of bitter expe- 
riences and keen distress. His letters show us how 



136 THE APOSTLE PAUL, 



greatly he suffered from this intestine struggle, from 
the treachery of some of his friends and the fickle- 
ness of his most beloved Churches. But, we hasten 
to add, without these great troubles we should never 
have known Paul at his greatest, nor guessed how 
tender his heart was, how heroic his faith, how 
vigorous his mind, how infinite the resources of his 
strong and supple genius. He was indeed born for 
conflict, and in it his spiritual nature acquired its full 
maturity and developed all its powers. 

Attacked almost simultaneously at every point of 
his work, Paul does not shrink from the contest ; he 
redoubles his energies, and makes himself almost 
ubiquitous, everywhere confronting his adversaries 
and never for one moment doubting of victory. For 
four or five years this great controversy absorbed his 
whole thought and energy ; it was the leading fact 
which dominated and distinguished this second period. 
Our great epistles are the issue of these truly tragic 
circumstances, and can only be thoroughly understood 
in their light. These epistles are not theological 
treatises, so much as pamphlets ; they are the crush- 
ing and terrible blows with which the mighty com- 
batant openly answered the covert intrigues of his 
enemies. The contest is in reality a drama, which 
grows larger and more complicated as it advances 
from Galatia to Rome. The letters to the Galatians, 
the Corinthians, and the Romans, which are its 
principal acts, mark also its successive phases. They 
are in close connexion with each other, and enable 
us to establish a twofold progress, both in external 
events and in the mind of the apostle, which we shall 
now proceed to demonstrate. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

THE epistle to the Galatians, the earliest of the 
four, enables us to witness the first outbreak of 
this prolonged struggle. With its opening words, we 
are in the midst of the fray ; and from beginning to 
end it is simply the apostle's vehement answer to the 
unlooked-for attack of his enemies. It would be 
hopeless, therefore, even to attempt to understand it, 
without first having a clear perception of the character 
of these Judaizing teachers, the nature of their con- 
tention, and the strength of their arguments. Upon 
these points, fortunately, the letter itself supplies us 
with all necessary information. 

The Galatians had received Paul's earliest preach- 
ing with an enthusiasm and gratitude which had 
touched and charmed him (Gal. iv. 14). Their cor- 
diality had been maintained throughout the apostle's 
sojourn with them ; and he had carried away from 
Galatia the most pleasing impressions and the 
brightest hopes. When therefore he heard of such a 
speedy defection, his astonishment was only equalled 
by his distress (Gal. i. 6). 

What is it that had happened ? After Paul's 
departure, there had arrived in Galatia certain men 
whom he only chooses to designate by the somewhat 
scornful term rives, quidam (i. 7). The new mission- 

J 37 



138 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



aries brought to these young societies not, as they 
would have it, another gospel, but those very Judaic 
claims for which they had already pleaded at Jeru- 
salem, and obtained a momentary triumph at Antioch. 
They supported them by the name and example of 
the Twelve, and by the authority of the mother 
Church in Jerusalem. The apostles whom Christ has 
ordained, who lived with Him and received His 
directions and teaching, live and preach differently 
from Paul. Above all, it is not true, as Paul teaches, 
that the old covenant has been abolished by the 
death of Christ. God cannot be unfaithful and de- 
part from His promise ; nor take back what He has 
once given. Now, He made an eternal covenant with 
Abraham, and promised salvation to the children of 
Abraham only. The word of God remains. So far 
from having abolished this covenant, the death of 
Christ only has its full effect and actual virtue within 
the covenant, and for those who have entered into it. 
Into this covenant you must enter, if you wish to 
belong to the true Messianic people. Unless you are 
circumcised, and thus become children of Abraham, 
you cannot be saved. So they reasoned. 

Paul's doctrine and that of the Judaizers may be 
summed up in two assertions. He declared : " The 
law and its ceremonies are nothing without the cross 
of Christ, and nothing to the believer in Christ." — 
" The death of Christ, and faith in Christ," they re- 
plied, " are nothing apart from circumcision and legal 
observance." At first sight, the difference between 
these phrases may not appear great ; at the bottom it 
is enormous. The first proposition is the negation of 
Judaism ; the second is the destruction of the Gospel. 

But Paul's adversaries would seem powerful indeed 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 139 

when they pointed out that his teaching ran counter 
to the entire Old Testament, and to the most solemn 
promises of Jehovah. Xor were they less so in 
quoting against him the example and teaching of the 
apostles at Jerusalem, the only true heirs of the word 
of Christ. Finally, they must have succeeded in 
shaking the apostle's firmest friends, when they urged 
that the abolition of the law compromised the holiness 
of God, and encouraged sin by removing the barriers 
against it ; and when they showed that this so-called 
Christian liberty degenerated into a license that no 
longer had either law or limit. The doctrine of Paul, 
they concluded, is the subversion at once of all 
authority, all truth, and all morality. 

But this radical negation of Paul's gospel involved 
the negation of his apostleship. The discussion of 
his views resolved itself inevitably into a violent 
personal attack. Who is this newcomer, that he 
should set himself up against the first apostles, and 
against the word of God itself? What is his 
authority ? He has not seen Christ ; he has not been 
made an apostle. What little he knows of the Gospel, 
has been learned from the Lord's real disciples ; and 
now he revolts against them ! Why does he separate 
himself from them ? Why does he not reproduce their 
preaching in its full and proper form ? His mission 
is purely extemporized ; and he has constituted him- 
self an apostle on his own authority, and out of his 
mere fancy. He claims, no doubt, to have received 
revelations, and to have had visions vouchsafed to 
him ; but what proof have we that his assertions are 
true? Must we believe it on the strength of his 
word ? Besides, how can these mere personal revela- 
tions that he alleges hold good against the traditional 



1 4° THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

teaching of men who lived so long with Jesus, who 
saw His face and heard His words? Is not this 
tradition the standard by which we must test every 
private vision, in order to ascertain whether it comes 
from God or from the Devil ? The surest proof that 
the new apostle's visions are nothing but falsehood is 
that they contradict and subvert the true doctrine of 
Jesus Christ. His assumed independence is nothing 
but culpable audacity ; his gospel is a mutilated 
gospel ; his apostleship, a usurpation ; and his attack 
on the law, a sacrilege. The Galatians must beware 
of him as an enemy ; they must hasten to enter into 
communion with the true Church of the Messiah by 
submitting themselves to the Divine ordinances. 

What an impression this skilful and sweeping 
attack must have made on the fickle minds of these 
Galatian tribes ! The new teachers, apparently, had 
the facts on their side — the external tradition of 
Christ and the apostles, and of the Old Testament. 
The gospel of Paul rested on his personal testimony 
alone. How could this authority counterbalance that 
of the traditions of Jerusalem ? 

Is it surprising that the Galatians, ready, it would 
seem, for all novelties, should have been seized with 
distrust of the apostle, and have eagerly accepted the 
new gospel ? 

But Paul was not the man to abandon the struggle. 
His defence rose to the height of the danger. So 
far from weakening the force of his opponents' argu- 
mentation, I conceive that his logical mind has 
strengthened it, and given it a sequence and inner 
cohesion that it probably lacked in their own repre- 
sentation. It may be reduced to these three essential 
points : 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 141 

1. They deny the Divine origin of his gospel, and 
the independence of his apostleship : whatever he 
knows of the Gospel, he received, they say, from the 
other apostles, and his authority must consequently 
be subordinated to theirs. His adversaries may even 
have added that in the presence of the pillars of the 
Church at Jerusalem he had taken care not to assert 
his empty claims (Gal. ii. 1 1 ff.). 

2. This gospel of human origin is, in addition, 
false in substance ; for it destroys the law, and is in 
flagrant contradiction to the Old Testament. 

3. This gospel, human in origin and false in prin- 
ciple, is further disastrous in its practical results. By 
doing away with the law it removes the barrier 
between the elect and sinners (d/jLaprcoXoi). 1 

This triple attack gives us the actual plan of the 
epistle to the Galatians, and enables us to see the 
strength of its structure. Paul proceeds to take up 
and refute these accusations. He has to maintain 
the independence and authority of his apostleship, 
and the intrinsic truth of his gospel ; and moreover to 
explain the moral consequences which, logically and 
in point of fact, result from it. Hence the three main 
divisions of his letter, which has been somewhat 
inadequately divided into an historical (chaps, i., ii.), a 
dogmatical (chaps, iii., iv.), and moral section (chaps, v., 
vi.). These three parts follow each other in logical suc- 
cession. They are, in fact, the three essential branches 
of the same demonstration. Perhaps no other of 
Paul's letters has such a powerful inner cohesion, or so 
much unity of character. Its one idea, from first to 

1 See Holsten, op. cit., Inhalt unci Gedankengang des Briefes 
an die Galater, p. 241. 



H2 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



last, is the Gospel of faith, whose origin, principle, and 
consequences are explained in turn and in progressive 
order. The refutation of the Judaizers' arguments 
becomes, thanks to the apostle's dialectics, the lumi- 
nous and triumphant exposition of his own views. 

The general forms of thought which met the 
requirements of the apostle's missionary preaching, 
manifestly could no longer suffice for this controversy; 
and they disappeared. Paul's belief, in all its distinct- 
ness, at last finds trenchant and decisive utterance. 
Its whole import is contained in the following 
antithesis, which from this time becomes its charac- 
teristic : f testification by faith, and justification through 
the lata ; things new, and tilings old ; the flesh, and 
the spirit ; the time of bondage, and the time of liberty. 
Paulinism has reached its transforming crisis. 

I. Paul's Apostolic Commission. 

When writing to the Thessalonians, Paul did not 
in his superscription give himself any title. The 
superscription of the epistle to the Galatians, on the 
contrary, is exceptionally solemn. This circumstance 
by itself shows, from the outset, the change that had 
taken place in the apostle's position. He now asserts, 
and with remarkable emphasis, at once the Divine 
origin of his apostleship (airocrroXo^ ov/c air avOpcoircov 
ov&e 8l } dvdpcoirov, aWci Sea 'Irjaov XpLcrrov Kal ©eov 
irarpos), and the essential principle of that Gospel 
which it is his business to preach, and to defend 
against all opponents: "Jesus, delivered unto death 
for our sins, according to the will of God our Father " 
(chap. i. 4). 

Full of indignation and astonishment, Paul flings 
himself eagerly into the question at issue. Verses 



THE EPISTLE TO 'THE GALA TUNS. 143 

6-10 lay down the thesis to be demonstrated in the 
epistle: "I marvel that you should have allowed your- 
selves to be so quickly turned aside from Him who 
called you in the grace of Christ, to another gospel. 
— Another gospel ? There is none. The fact is, there 
are certain mischief-makers who wish to pervert the 
gospel of Christ. But if any one, were it ourselves or 
an angel from heaven, came to declare a different 
gospel, let him be anathema ! I have said, and I 
repeat, If any one preach a different gospel, let him 
be anathema ! Am I seeking to commend myself to 
men, or to God ? Or am I seeking to please men ? 
If I were still trying to please men, I should not be a 
minister of Christ." x 

After this exordium ex abrupto, the first part of the 
epistle immediately begins, and extends to the end 
of the second chapter. Paul first asserts the Divine 
origin of his gospel under its negative form : The 
gospel that I have declared, is not according to man. 
I have not received, neither learned it from any man ; 
— then, under its positive form : / hold it by a direct 
revelation from Jesus Christ (chap. i. 11, 12). He 
proves this absolute independence of his gospel by 
a threefold series of arguments, which fortify each 
other and form a powerful gradation. 

1. Paul insists on the absolutely miraculous nature 
of the event which made him a Christian, and an 



1 These last words, taken along with another passage in the 
epistle (v. 11), can only be understood as alluding to a time 
when Paul adopted a conciliatory policy toward certain men (the 
Judaizers), and made certain concessions in order to avoid 
giving offence. But the time for concession is now passed. The 
apostle may not suffer himself to be checked by any regard for 
persons, under pain of becoming himself unfaithful to Christ. 



H4 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

apostle. It was in the midst of his zeal for Judaism 
and his persecuting fury that the grace of God 
(evSoKrjcrev Bta t/}? ^dptTo^ avrov), which had set him 
apart from his mother's womb, took possession of him. 
No man intervened between his conscience and the 
Divine call. It was God Himself who revealed His 
Son in his soul, and at the same time commissioned 
him to go and preach Him among the heathen. This 
work, begun without man's agency, was also com- 
pleted without man's participation (ov Trpoaavede/uajv 
aaptcl Kal aiftart). The purpose of vers. 16-24 is 
to insist on the isolation in which Paul lived : he 
emphatically declares that he did not see Peter and 
James until three years after his conversion, and then 
only for a few days. By virtue of this call, which was 
solely of God, he has laboured and preached as an 
apostle to the Gentiles for fourteen years ; and with 
so much success that the Churches of Judaea, to whom 
he was unknown, glorified God nevertheless, because 
His grace had turned a persecutor into so mighty an 
instrument for the extension of His kingdom. 

2. But this is not all. Not only did he carry on 
his labours as an apostle for a long period in absolute 
independence, but also the mission entrusted to him 
by God, and which, to be sure, needs no confirma- 
tion from men (however great and influential their 
position), has been officially recognised by the apostles 
at Jerusalem, — by those who pass for pillars of the x 
Church, Peter, James, and John. They gave him the 
right hand of fellowship, and acknowledged that 
while Peter had received the apostleship of the Jews, 
he, Paul, was equally entitled to the apostleship of 
the Gentiles (chap. ii. 1-10). 

3. Furthermore, his apostleship is so entirely in- 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIAXS. 145 



dependent of that of the other disciples of Jesus, that 
on one occasion he was enabled, in virtue of this 
Divine vocation and the authority it conferred upon 
him, to reprove Peter and recall him to the right path, 
from which he had attempted to depart. This was 
at Antioch. He went so far as to condemn Peter, 
because he was to be blamed ; he made him feel both 
the duplicity of his conduct and the inconsistency of 
his views ; he succeeded in making the Gospel of 
Jesus Christ triumph over all the fears and scruples 
of the one party, and the opposition of the other. 
He solemnly declared on that occasion the truth that 
he preaches — viz, that no flesh is justified by the law, 
but every believer is justified solely by his faith in 
Christ For, he insisted, the choice must be made : 
either Christ saves us, and in that case the law does 
not ; or else it is the law that saves, and in that case 
Christ died in vain. In this manner, Paul naturally 
passes from the subject of the origin of his gospel to 
its exposition and the demonstration of its contents. 
So the first leads to the second part of his letter. 

II. The Doctrine of the Gospel. 

This threefold demonstration of the Divine origin 
of his gospel has wrought upon the apostle's own 
feelings. The truth at this point seems to him so 
plain, that he cannot possibly understand the defection 
of the Galatians : " O foolish Galatians, who then 
has bewitched you ? " With this vigorous apostrophe 
the second part of the epistle opens. His object is 
now to show the intrinsic truth of his gospel, and its 
profound harmony with the Old Testament. 

Without doubt, the saying of the new teachers 
which had done most to shake the Galatians' faith 

10 



1.46 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

was that ancient, ever powerful phrase : " We are the 
children of Abraham " (comp. Matt. iii. 9). Salvation 
belongs to the elect race alone. Now, God has given 
in circumcision a sign by which the children of Abra- 
ham are to be known. Those who are without it do 
not belong to the people of God, and can have no 
share in their privileges. This is the reasoning that 
the apostle had to overthrow. For this theocratic and 
narrow Messianism, Paul will substitute the great 
universal scheme, the spiritual history of the king- 
dom of God and of its revelation upon earth. To 
the carnal descent from Abraham, he will oppose the 
spiritual and only true filiation — that of faith. He will 
appeal, in his turn, to the promise made to the father 
of the faithful ; he will show in what manner salva- 
tion is connected with it, and how the law is related 
to it. He will thus reconstruct the genuine tradition 
of Israel ; and it will be seen whether he or his 
enemies are its true representatives. 

We can now understand why the faith of Abraham 
plays such an important part in Pauline theology. 
It was not arbitrarily that the apostle chose this 
example, rather than another. The promise made to 
the patriarch was the common basis of argument, both 
for Paul and the Judaizers; and upon this promise and 
its accompanying conditions a keen debate was sure 
to arise, for this was the crucial question. The whole 
discussion turns upon this first point. If the Law 
qualifies and limits the Promise, it is plain that it will 
continue to be the eternal condition of salvation. In 
the epistle to the Romans we shall find Paul returning 
to this example of Abraham, intent on showing that 
faith, without the observance of the law, is the sole 
condition implied in the promise. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 147 

He appeals here at the outset to the actual fact of 
the conversion of the Galatians — a fact which was 
undeniable, and, in his view, sufficient of itself to 
overthrow the Judaizers' vain pretensions. " You 
have been converted ; you have received the Spirit, 
the earnest of life eternal, the pledge of your adoption. 
Well, I ask you, was it in consequence of the works 
of the law, or through the preaching of faith, that 
you experienced all that ? Or is it all to be in vain ? 
— See how inconsistent you are : you began in the 
Spirit, and you would finish in the flesh ! God has 
wrought in you, and produced through His Spirit all 
the fruits of the new life : do you not see then that 
the promise made to Abraham is fulfilled in you 
through faith, and that the true sons of Abraham 
are those who are so by faith ? Through faith the 
promise was given ; through faith, and not by the 
law, it is fulfilled." 

Paul now comes to the formulation of his great 
distinction between the law and the promise, which, 
in the first instance, he contrasts with each other. So 
far from the promise being fulfilled in and by the 
law, they produce a diametrically opposite effect. 
The end of the promise is blessing (evXojla) ; and the 
inevitable effect of the law is the curse (fcardpa). 
All those who place themselves under the law are 
under the curse (vtto Kardpav elcriv). Christ placed 
Himself under the law and became a curse for us, in 
order to redeem us from the curse. Wherefore it is 
in Jesus Christ, and not in the law, that it is possible 
for the Gentiles to obtain the blessing of Abraham 
(chap. iii. 9-14). 

This reasoning seems unanswerable. But Paul 
further urges and illustrates it by a comparison drawn 



M8 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



from human relationships (/cara avOpwirov \eyco). 
When a man has made a testament, nothing can 
nullify his fixed decree ; nothing can be added to it. 
Now a testament was made in favour of Abraham's 
heir (tg3 airepfxarL avrov). The promise was- made 
to his seed, — that is, to Christ. The law which came 
in 430 years later could neither abolish nor change it. 
So that it is not the law which gives us our title as 
heirs, but the promise, the free gift of the grace of 
God. 

Hitherto Paul has been contrasting the promise 
and the law ; he has shown that the law brought 
about a state diametrically opposed to that contem- 
plated by the promise, whose realization it was bound 
to seek. But it was not enough to set aside the law 
thus absolutely by a mere negation ; its positive 
value must also be understood and explained. If the 
law is contrary to the promise, of what use is it ? 
What part was assigned to it in the Divine plan ? 
Why was it given ? This is the question which in- 
evitably meets us here (riovv 6 vofio^; chap. iii. 19). 
The apostle, in answering it, completes his demon- 
stration. The following verses, which contain this 
answer, are the most important and the most difficult 
in the epistle to the Galatians. They furnish the 
key to the Pauline theory of the progress of Divine 
revelation. But they are concise to an extent com- 
pared with which the style of Tacitus is prolixity 
itself. At every point thought defeats expression. 

For what purpose is the law, it has been asked ? 
It was superadded (irpoaeredi]) as something external, 
in a provisional, temporary sense (a%/H? ov) ; and that 
for the sake • of transgressions, — which is to say, in 
prder to produce and multiply transgressions (j&v 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALA! LANS. 149 

Trapaftdcrecov x^P LV ^pocreredr] = 6 vop.o<; irapetai]\6ev 
Iva irXeovucrr) to Trapdirrcofia, Rom. v. 20). Thus 
transgression, the actual realization of sin, is the 
primary end of the law. It is an essential, but transi- 
tory factor in the development of the plan of salva- 
tion. The law was designed to carry sin to the height 
of its power and its extreme consequences ; it had 
this function to fulfil, up till the time of the coming 
of the seed of Abraham — vis. Christ — to whom the 
promise had been made. The much disputed words 
which follow (Sicnayels &i dyyeXcov iv X €L P L A te<Jt ' TOL 
are still part of Paul's answer to the question pro- 
pounded. From the form and manner in which the 
law was given, Paul infers its character. The apostle, 
as Holsten rightly perceived, did not intend by these 
words either to disparage or glorify the law, but to 
bring out its intermediate and subordinate character. 

Nothing shows better than these accessory circum- 
stances that the law was not an end in itself, not 
the final goal, but simply a means. As the angels 
are ministers working after the Divine plan, so the 
law is a minister, working towards the fulfilment of 
the promise ; given by the hand of a mediator, it still 
continues to be a mediator, — a middle term between 
the promise made to Abraham and its fulfilment in 
Christ, designed to fill up the interval that elapsed 
between Abraham and his heir. 

But what is the meaning of the yet more obscure 
twentieth verse, 6 fxea-tTT]^ evo? ovrc eariv, 6 Se @eo? 
el? early? In form the verse is a syllogism. The 
mediator is not of one alone ; but God is one, 
therefore the mediator is not of God. What does this 
mean, if not that the mediation to be accomplished 
by the law has nothing to do with God ? God being 



150 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



ever in absolute unity, has no need in Himself of 
any mediation. But every mediation at least implies 
a duality. It is in history, and in humanity, that this 
mediation has to be accomplished ; where, in fact, a 
duality does exist between the Jews and Gentiles, 
which has occupied the whole period intervening 
between the time of the promise and its accomplish- 
ment. The law, which multiplies transgressions, 
places Jews under sin as well as Gentiles ; it con- 
stitutes them sinners like the Gentiles ; and this is its 
function, till the Redeemer's coming. The law, there- 
fore, is not contrary to the promise ; for in reality it is 
intended to bring about its fulfilment. Neither is the 
reign of the law a simple interregnum, or parenthesis, 
but a necessary factor in the evolution of Divine 
grace. The law is an active agent which labours, and 
with full success, to make men realize sin and to 
bring them all under the curse. It is a tutor, a peda- 
gogue, who keeps them in this state against the 
coming of faith (i(f>povpov/n€0a avyKe/cXeta/jievot). 

This 23rd verse has often been misunderstood ; the 
words i(j)povpov{Ae6a, iraihaycoyo^, etc., have led some 
to believe that the law was given to check sin, and 
so to lead man by an actual progress up to Christ. 
This idea is not at all Pauline, but the very reverse of 
the apostle's real doctrine. The law has only one 
aim : to multiply sin by realizing it ; to constitute all 
men sinners, and like a gaoler to guard them, shut 
up under sin. Thus the law brings about the unity 
of all men after a negative fashion, by placing them 
all equally under the curse. Christ, on the contrary, 
realizes this unity in a positive manner, by making 
all men alike children of God. " In Christ there is 
no longer Greek nor Jew, nor slave nor free, nor man 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 151 

nor woman, for you are all united in Him. And if 
you are of Christ, you are of the seed of Abraham, 
and therefore heirs according to the promise." Such 
is the apostle's conclusion (chap. iii. 29). 

To sum up, the law is neither absolutely identical 
with the promise, nor absolutely opposed to it. It is 
not the negation of the promise ; but it is distinct 
from it, and subordinate to it. Its final purpose lies 
in the promise itself. It is an essential, but transi- 
tional element in the historical development of 
humanity. It must needs disappear on attaining its 
goal. Christ is the end of the law. 

Thus Paul, in opposition to the theocratic and 
national Messianism of the Judaizers, succeeds in con- 
structing a new economy of salvation, a history of 
redemption, broad, profound, and singularly spiritual. 
It attains its realization in three stages — the Promise, 
the Laze, and Christ. The first and last terms are 
identical ; the law is the intermediary through which 
the promise reaches its final realization. 

A further comparison suffices to set the apostle's 
idea in its full light. Humanity is a child, who 
passes first of all through a period of minority. Man 
under the law is a minor in tutelage, a child with a 
pedagogue who simply forbids and commands. There 
is no difference between this condition and that of 
the slave. But this state of minority cannot last for 
ever. At the appointed time Christ came, to proclaim 
that the human race had attained its majority. Man 
henceforward is freed, from tutelage ; he is the heir put 
in possession of his patrimony. It is as reasonable a 
thing to seek to reduce the child of God again under 
the law, as it would be to make the mature man return 
to the rudiments, to those elementary things {v-ToiyjdcL) 



152 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

which served to guide his youth. Between the reli- 
gion of the letter and that of the spirit there is all 
the distance that lies between childhood and maturity. 
Such was the Divine adoption, the liberty and spiritual 
manhood which the apostle came to declare to the 
Galatians, and which they had received with so much 
enthusiasm and gratitude. Is all this to be rendered 
vain ? 

To make his victory complete, Paul sums up his 
exposition once more in his admirable allegory of 
Sarah the free-woman and Hagar the bond-woman. 
The children of the free-woman are free as she is; 
the children of the bond-woman are slaves like their 
mother. The true heir is not Ishmael, the purely 
carnal son ; it is Isaac, the spiritual son, the child of 
faith. 

III. The Gospel in its Practical Effect. 

This allegory, while summing up the second part 
of the epistle to the Galatians, is also the transition 
which leads us to the third part. The goal of the 
apostle's powerful demonstration is the idea of Chris- 
tian liberty, so that this last section is no less essential 
to the structure of the epistle than the other two. 
It is its completion and necessary conclusion. The 
Gospel of faith becomes the Gospel of freedom. 
Paul's whole discourse centres in two ideas : 
I. Christian liberty is a privilege of which the 
Galatians must not suffer themselves to be robbed. 
They must vindicate it against the attempts of the 
new teachers, who would re-impose the yoke from 
which Christ had freed them. " I Paul declare to 
you, that if you are circumcised, Christ will no longer 
avail you anything" (chap. v. 1-12). 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 153 

2. But this liberty must not be used as a starting 
point or occasion for fleshly lusts ; it asserts itself 
only that it may in turn submit to the law of love. 
" Free by faith, make yourselves slaves by love." 
Love is only another name for liberty ; and liberty, 
so far from overthrowing the law, is on the contrary 
the sole means of its fulfilment. For the law is ful- 
filled by love (vers. 13-15). 

Faul does not stop there. He wishes to show the 
actual consequences of his doctrine. To admit the 
principle of faith, and live in sin, is a logical impos- 
sibility. Here we have the first outlines of the moral 
psychology which is developed in the epistle to the 
Romans. The apostle points out to the Galatians the 
conflict existing in every man between the flesh and 
the spirit, one in which the law of good is always 
conquered by the power of sin. But, he adds, the 
flesh was crucified with Christ, so that the believer 
is, with Christ, dead to sin ; if he lives henceforward, 
he lives by the new Spirit of Christ. By a necessary 
consequence, he must no longer walk according to 
the flesh which is dead, but according to the Spirit 
of holiness which raised Christ from the dead (chap. 
v. 16-26). 

Such is the epistle to the Galatians, now lying 
before us complete in its three divisions, — the first, 
perhaps the most admirable, manifestation of the 
apostle's genius. There is nothing in ancient or 
modern literature to be compared with it. All the 
powers of Paul's soul shine forth in these few pages. 
Broad and luminous views, keen logic, biting irony 
— everything that is most forcible in argument, vehe- 
ment in indignation, ardent and tender in affection. 



154 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



is found here combined and poured forth in a single 
stream, forming a work of irresistible power. Its 
style is no less original than the matter of its ideas, 
and has in truth been perfected in the same conflict 
which matured the apostle's thought. Although 
Paul's manner is discernible in the two epistles to 
the Thessalonians, there is nevertheless a wide dis- 
tinction in character between those two letters and 
the epistle to the Galatians. Here the true Pauline 
type reveals itself, in its bold and full originality. 
The celebrated maxim, The style is the man, was 
never better verified. 

Paul's language is his living image. There is the 
same striking contrast between his thought and its 
expression as was presented by his feeble constitution 
and ardent spirit. It is an inferior style, — poor in its 
external form, its phraseology rude and incorrect, its 
accent barbarous. As the apostle's body, a "vessel of 
clay," yields under the weight of his ministry, so the 
words and form of his diction bend and break beneath 
the weight of his thought. But from this contrast 
spring the most marvellous effects. What power in 
weakness ! What wealth in poverty ! W r hat a fiery 
soul in this frail body ! The style does not sustain 
the thought, it is that which sustains the style, giving 
to it its force, its life and beauty. Thought presses 
on — overcharged, breathless and hurried — dragging 
the words after it ! — It is a veritable torrent, which 
channels its own deep bed and rushes onward, over- 
throwing all barriers in its way. Unfinished phrases, 
daring omissions, parentheses which leave us out of 
sight and out of breath, rabbinical subtleties, audacious 
paradoxes, vehement apostrophes pour on like surging 
billows. Mere words, in their ordinary meaning, are 



THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 15; 



insufficient to sustain this overwhelming plenitude 
of thought and feeling. Every phrase is obliged, so 
to speak, to bear a double and triple burden. In a 
single proposition, or in a couple of words strung 
together, Paul has lodged a whole world of ideas. 
It is this which makes the exegesis of his epistles so 
difficult, and their translation absolutely impossible. 

From a dogmatic point of view, however, the epistle 
to the Galatians is after all no more than a pro- 
gramme. All the essential ideas of the Pauline 
system are indicated in it, but they are not worked 
out. It is indeed a masterly sketch ; the epistle to 
the Romans turns the sketch into a picture. 



CHAPTER II. 

THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 

BETWEEN the epistle to the Galatians and the 
epistle to the Romans come in chronological 
order the two letters to the Corinthians. 

The conflict raging in Galatia was of a simple and 
open character. It was the flagrant opposition of two 
contending principles. At Corinth the struggle was 
complicated by a multitude of special difficulties. It 
is less dogmatic, and more personal. Paul's enemies 
have renounced, or at least concealed their preten- 
sions. They do not raise the question either of cir- 
cumcision or of the law. But their animosity is none 
the less fierce for being more secret. It raises up a 
crowd of practical difficulties in the apostle's way, and 
forces upon him questions of the most grave and 
the most delicate nature, through which his authority 
is covertly assailed. Hence the changed character of 
Paul's polemics. In this complex situation the con- 
densed and solid argumentation of the epistle to the 
Galatians would be inappropriate. He has not now to 
give a formal refutation of error, but to solve a variety 
of practical problems, — to quell disputes, repress dis- 
orders, and disconcert his opponents' schemes. For 
this task he needed tact equally with logic, adroitness 
as well as firmness. Paul's doctrine, so concentrated 

^6 



THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 157 

in the epistle to the Galatians, is here expanded in a 
multitude of varied applications. The stream hitherto 
pent in spreads itself into a thousand channels ; but 
it flows in the same direction, and while dividing 
becomes enriched. We shall see in the epistle to the 
Romans, how at a later period all its streams meet 
again and resume their broad and mighty course. 

The Church of Corinth was one of the apostle's 
noblest creations. It was, as he says himself, the child 
that he had begotten amid many sorrows (1 Cor. iv. 
9-15), and had nourished and reared with tenderest 
love. But this child was of Greek birth, and retained 
the tendencies and temperament of its race. The 
quarrelsome spirit native to the Greek city re- 
appeared in the Christian Church. The new faith, 
with its hopes and mysteries, seems to have stimu- 
lated the hereditary disposition to curiosity and subtle 
disputations. In this town of Corinth, with its mixed 
population, so wealthy and so corrupt, the quest for 
pleasure and sensual enjoyment was combined with 
intellectual refinement. At that period, to lead a dis- 
orderly life was called to Corinthianize. On reading 
the descriptions of the moral condition of this great 
city given by pagan writers, we are no longer sur- 
prised that the little Christian congregation in its 
midst, formed probably out of its most impure ele- 
ments, was tainted in some degree with the general 
corruption. These circumstances account for the 
situation of the Church, as it appears in Paul's first 
letter to the Corinthians. 

Some of its members were leading disorderly lives. 
One of them was actually living with his father's 
wife, and had not been excommunicated. There were 
heated discussions about divorce, about the respective 



5§ THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



advantages of celibacy and marriage, about sacrificial 
meats. The celebration of the Agapae gave rise to 
scandals. The assemblies were stormy ; every one 
was eager to parade, in season and out of season, the 
spiritual gifts that he claimed to possess. Pride and 
jealousies flourished. A few, more refined than the 
rest, did not believe in the resurrection of the body. 
Lastly — and this perhaps was the most serious symp- 
tom of all — the Church was split into factions, each 
taking for its flag the name of some preacher of the 
Gospel, as formerly in the Greek republics the citizens 
were wont to rally round one or other of the popular 
orators. One said, I am for Apollos ; another, I am 
for Paul ; another, I am for CepJias ; another again, 
I am for Christ (i Cor. i. 10-12). 

What is the real import of these disputes ? Were 
there four parties, each with a definite and settled 
constitution ? Certainly not. From a dogmatic point 
of view, such sects could have had no raison d'etre ; 
and those who try to discover one are obliged to 
reduce them to two factions — that of Paul, and of 
Cephas. But it will be observed that in this first 
letter Paul nowhere combats a dogmatic tendency 
opposed to his own. In the earlier chapters especially, 
his condemnation bears on the mere fact of the dis- 
putes ; and indeed he throws blame on his own 
partisans and those of Apollos, rather than on the 
adherents of Cephas (chaps, iii. 4-9 ; iv. 6). Finally, 
he places Cephas, Paul, and Apollos on the same level, 
as so many servants of Christ belonging to the Corin- 
thians, but to whom the Corinthians in their turn 
do not belong : " Whether Paul, Apollos, or Cephas — 
all are yours ; you are Christ's, and Christ is God's." 
Here is order ; and here is unity. If Paul had been 



THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 159 

encountering a party division, or a conflict similar to 
that in Galatia, how could such a mode of procedure 
on his part be explained ? It is a vain attempt to 
seek to trace out these four parties, especially the 
Christ party, either in the remainder of this epistle or 
in the second. 1 

In fact, the language of chap. 1. 12 does not describe 
a general and permanent state of affairs, but a momen- 
tary situation which very soon altered. It is the 
beginning of a fermentation in which all the elements 
are still mingled and contending together ; the Church 
was seized with the fever of Greek democracy. In 
such rivalries persons play a more important part 
than principles. But the agitation wonderfully served 
to facilitate the attempts of Paul's antagonists. The 
latter, arriving with letters of recommendation, brought 
with them a new leaven ; they laboured secretly to 
effect a profound schism. Paul's letter, the arrival of 
the Judaizing teachers (2 Cor. iii. 1), the logic of prin- 
ciples, and above all, as we shall see, the affair of the 
incestuous person, led to the separation of the con- 
tending elements ; and from this general agitation 
there were evolved two parties radically opposed, — ■ 
one adhering to Paul, the other to the Judaizers. 



1 Paulus, vol. i., pp. 287 ff. [Eng. trans., i., 269 if.]. The error 
of Baurs exegesis of 1 Cor. i. 10-12, to my mind, arises from the 
mistaken idea with which he starts, that the first and second 
epistles to the Corinthians imply an identical situation in the 
Church. But it is obvious that in the interval the situation 
had materially changed, and that for the worse. The four 
earlier parties had speedily disappeared, and given birth to two 
that were dogmatic and essentially different, — the Pauline and 
the Judaizing party. It is this progress of the contest at Corinth 
that we have endeavoured to make evident. 



160 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Such is the situation afterwards disclosed by the 
second epistle to the Corinthians. But the agitation 
is at present somewhat complicated and undefined. 
Beneath the actual disputes Paul's insight detects 
unmistakably a greater danger ; he divines a secret 
hostility to his gospel ; indeed he throws out already 
a few words here and there in the nature of a defence 
(chaps, iv., ix.), but always in a veiled and indirect 
manner. It is the interests of the Church for which 
he is here concerned, and in a general way. Farther 
on, when the Judaizing party is unmasked, we shall 
find him resuming the controversy in a style more 
ironical, more keen and penetrating than ever. Such, 
it seems to us, was the course of affairs, and the 
progress of the struggle in the midst of the Church 
at Corinth. 

It was impossible that this epistle, addressed to so 
complex a situation and such varied needs, should 
assume the systematic and logical construction of the 
letter to the Galatians. The apostle, however, has 
managed to group into a few great divisions the 
numerous questions presented to him, and has im- 
parted some degree of method to his long reply. 

His letter seems to fall naturally into three main 
divisions : 

I. The first includes the general questions (chaps. 
i.-vi.). Paul reviews the state of the Church, setting 
it in a decidedly gloomy aspect. He first of all pro- 
tests against the internal divisions which are rending 
it asunder (chaps, i.-iv.) ; against the scandals which 
disgrace it, especially the crime of the incestuous 
person (chap, v.) ; and, lastly, against the habit which 
the believers have formed of carrying their law-suits 
before heathen tribunals (chap. vi.). 



THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 161 

2. In a second group of questions the apostle 
distributes the inquiries that the Corinthians them- 
selves had proposed to him in writing, irepl he wv 
iypdyjrare (chaps, vii.-x.). He discusses in succession 
marriage, celibacy, widowhood, divorce, and meats 
sacrificed to idols. The solution of all these diffi- 
culties is deduced from a general principle, which 
Paul has always accepted as his own rule throughout 
his apostleship (chaps, ix. and x.), and which he lays 
down in the following terms : All tilings are lazvfitl, 
but all things edify not. 

3. Lastly, after disposing of these general questions,. 
Paul enters more fully into the interior life of the 
Church, and corrects its defects and errors, proceed- 
ing by a well-marked gradation from the lighter to 
the more serious. He deals in succession with the 
position and deportment of women in the assemblies 
(chap. xi. 1-16) ; with the disorders which disturb the 
Agapae (vers. 17-34) ; with spiritual gifts, their diver- 
sity and unity, and the charity which excels them 
all (chaps, xii., xiii.) ; with the gift of tongues (chap, 
xiv.) ; and, finally, with the resurrection of the body 
(chap. xv.). He adds some advice with respect to the 
collection for the saints at Jerusalem, which he was 
organizing in all the Churches ; and sums up all his 
exhortations in the words so full of vigour : " Watch, 
stand fast in the faith, be manly and strong. Let 
love inspire all that you do" (chap. xvi. 13, 14). 

Such is the order of this first epistle. In spite of 
the variety of questions touched upon, a profound 
unity prevails throughout it. Paul's dialectical mind, 
instead of stopping short at the surface of these par- 
ticular questions and losing itself in the details of a 
finely drawn casuistry, always ascends from facts to 

11 



162 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

principles, and thus sheds a fuller light on all the 
difficulties presented to it by the way. After he has 
carried the mind of his readers up to the serene 
heights of Christian thought, he sweeps down from 
this elevation with irresistible force ; and each solution 
that he suggests is simply a new application of the 
permanent and general principles of the Gospel. This 
epistle exhibits, as one might say, the expansion of 
the Christian principle, as it spreads into the sphere 
of practical affairs. In it the new life created by the 
spirit of Jesus becomes conscious of itself, and asserts 
its unique and independent character, — distinguished 
on the one hand from the Jewish life with its servi- 
tude, and on the other from the pagan life with its 
license. Our modern Christian civilization, with its 
liberty and solidarity, its constant demand for reform 
its impulses towards progress, its delicate charity and 
scrupulousness, its inner vigour, and its ever enlarging 
ideal, is all here in the germ. A great revolution is 
commencing. Already accomplished in individual 
souls, it begins to manifest itself outwardly in social 
and domestic relationships. A new humanity is to 
issue from this new religion. 

Such is the import of the first Corinthian epistle. 
While the letter to the Galatians was the foundation 
of Cliristiaii dogma, the two letters to the Corinthians, 
signalizing as they do the emancipation of the regene- 
rate conscience, are the beginning of Christian ethics. 

Paul has clearly formulated the essential principle 
of this new consciousness ; it is the Spirit of God 
Himself immanent therein (i Cor. ii. 10-16). This 
does not imply a mere illumination, or a sanctifying 
influence ; but, if I may so call it, a transformation in 
the substance of our being. The Spirit becomes us, 



THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHiANS. 163 

and we become essentially spirit. This Spirit ot God, 
itself the creative power, makes of us a new creation 
(1 Cor. ii. 12). To the two classes of men thus formed 
there correspond two kinds of wisdom, the wisdom 
of the world and the wisdom of God, as contrary to 
each other as flesh and spirit, reason and folly. The 
carnal man cannot understand spiritual things (ficopla 
yap avrco ecniv). The wisdom of God becomes the 
folly of the cross, even as carnal wisdom is nothing 
but folly before God (chap. i. 21-25). 

The work of the Spirit within us is twofold. It is 
first of all negative, setting us free from all external 
dependence. " Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there 
is liberty" (2 Cor. iii. 17). "The spiritual man judges 
all things, and he himself is judged by nothing " 
(1 Cor. ii. 15). But this liberty is at the same time 
a positive virtue. For the Spirit is love, as essentially 
as He is liberty. This absolute independence becomes 
an absolute bondage ; for it is an independence which 
enslaves itself through love, and which sacrificing 
itself unremittingly, by each sacrifice finds itself en- 
larged. " Free from all things," cries the apostle, " I 
submit myself to all, in order to gain more souls for 
Christ" (chap. ix. 19). The liberty of faith is found 
in the bondage of love. 

From these principles results that great practical, 
eternal rule, which cuts short all casuistry, and which 
Paul is constantly applying : All tilings are lawful for 
me, but not all things are expedient (chap. vi. 12). It 
enables the apostle to make the logic of his principles 
everywhere triumphant without any wound to charity, 
and to resolve all moral questions in a manner in the 
highest degree both bold and delicate. 

On one point only the apostle's judgment appears 



1 64 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



to be still narrow, — I mean that of celibacy (chap. vii.). 
This narrowness, for which he has been so greatly 
blamed, does not arise from a dualistic asceticism. 
There is no dualism to be found in Paul's doctrine ; 
and it is obvious that there would be a strange 
contradiction between the asceticism of practice sup- 
posed, and the broad moral principles which we have 
just expounded. It is his eschatological views which, 
in this instance, check and trammel the apostle's 
reasoning (chap. vii. 29). The parcusia is imminent ; 
the time is short ; all other interests fade before this 
immediate future. But a further progress of thought 
on this subject was soon to take place in Paul's mind. 
Before long it finally shook off the narrow bonds of 
Jewish eschatology. In the epistles of the Captivity 
we shall find that he has arrived at a wider and more 
just appreciation 1 of marriage and domestic life. 

[ ' From what has been said it is clear that at the juncture 
marked by 1 Corinthians this " wider and more just appre- 
ciation" would have been out of place. But one is reluctant to 
think that Paul himself, with his sympathetic nature and Jewish 
training, had still to arrive at a just appreciation of marriage 
and domestic life. At the same time, we quite admit that his 
appreciation of marriage in its Christian bearings widened in 
later years.] 



CHAPTER III. 

THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 

NO other of Paul's letters is of equal importance 
to this second epistle in its bearing on the 
history of his inner consciousness. In none does his 
personality so prominently come into play or so 
spontaneously and fully reveal itself, as it does under 
the pressure of the bitter experiences and cruel griefs 
here recounted. It is easy to perceive that the second 
epistle bears no resemblance to the first, either in 
tone or contents. Manifestly, it arises out of an 
entirely new state of things, both in the Church of 
Corinth and in the apostle's mind. To define the 
relations of this letter to its predecessor, by recon- 
structing the history of the troubles at Corinth, which 
had now issued in open revolt ; to set forth the 
contents of the epistle ; and to describe the evolution 
of Paul's religious ideas in this, the most critical 
period of his life — such is the threefold task which 
now devolves upon us. 

I. State of the Corinthian Church. 

The second epistle to the Corinthians affords fur- 
ther evidence of the keen anxiety which the Church 
of Corinth gave the apostle, and the feverish suspense 
which had made him long for the return of Titus, his 
latest messenger. At the time when he wrote, the 

165 



1 66 THE AFOSTLE PAUL. 

storm was dispersing, and we only hear its final 
mutterings. But in the joy and gratitude with which 
Paul's soul overflows there linger the vibrations of his 
sorrow, his anger, and apprehension. A drama has 
evidently been enacted at Corinth, of which this letter 
is the denouement. Can we retrace its course ? 

Unquestionably, this very serious crisis was con- 
nected with the affair of the incestuous person, whose 
excommunication Paul had demanded (i Cor. v. 3). 
But the view of the subject generally taken is too 
narrow and isolated. This circumstance could not by 
itself have led to the far-reaching effects which are 
now apparent. It became a source of discord, only 
from the opportunity which it afforded Paul's adver- 
saries for attacking the integrity of his character and 
the authority of his apostleship. We admit, indeed, 
that the individual referred to in 2 Corinthians ii. 5, 6, is 
identical with the incestuous person designated in the 
first epistle by the same general pronouns, 6 toiovtos, 
and rt?. But he appears here in quite a different 
position. It is easy to see that there had been re- 
bellion on his part, and that he had committed out- 
rages against Paul (2 Cor. ii. 5 and 10). In his 
manner of recalling these injuries, we recognise the 
delicacy of the apostle's pen, and his disinterested 
spirit (el Si T£? \e\virrjKev ovtc i/ne XeXinrrjtcev. — koX 
jap eyco o Ke^dptcrpLai, ei tl KeyJipiapLai hC u/xa? ev 
TrpocrcoTTM Xpiarov). Nor is this all. Paul's directions 
had not been obeyed. Discussions had arisen on the 
mode of procedure proposed by the apostle, and 
the authority to which he laid claim. Instead of 
the unanimity in excommunicating the guilty person 
which he had expected from the Church, a majority 
and a minority had been formed ; and when punish- 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 167 

merit did take place, it was only decreed by the 
majority (77 liriTi^iia biro tcov TiXeiovcov, chap. ii. 6). 

A division like this, on a point of discipline so 
simple and obvious, is matter for astonishment. Is 
it conceivable that the minority hostile to Paul 
approved the conduct of the guilty person ? We know 
that on the question of impurity the Jewish Christians 
were even stricter than the apostle's partisans.- The 
cause of their opposition is to be found elsewhere. 

In order to discover it, wc must go back to chap. v. 
of the first epistle. " I, being absent in body, present 
in spirit, have resolved as if I were present, in the 
name of the Lord Jesus, you and my spirit being 
assembled, with the power of Jesus our Lord, to 
deliver such a man unto Satan, for the destruction of 
the flesh, and the salvation of the spirit at the day of 
the Lord." What did Paul mean by this demand? 
Evidently, he was thereby exercising his apostolic 
authority over the Church of Corinth. He was con- 
voking a general assembly of the Church, over which 
he wished to preside spiritually. He was acting 
in the capacity of an apostle of Jesus Christ, on a 
level with the Twelve, assuming to himself the same 
rights and authority. But it was precisely these 
rights and this authority that his Judaizing adver- 
saries at Corinth disputed. To obey his orders, under 
these circumstances, would be to acknowledge the 
very thing that they denied him. Now, it must not 
be forgotten how powerful the Judaizing tendency 
represented by the partisans of Cephas and Christ 
was in Corinth. The first epistle, without openly 
combating them, seems to suspect their hostility and 
secret menaces. Owing to the affair of the incestuous 
person and Paul's claims, that which in the first in- 



1 68 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

stance was only a discussion on the merits of different 
missionaries, had speedily become an ecclesiastical 
and dogmatic schism. The apostle's letter had helped 
to bring on the crisis, and to raise the main question. 
Furthermore, emissaries had arrived in the interval 
from Jerusalem or Palestine furnished with apostolic 
letters. The report of the violent debate between 
Paul and Peter at Antioch had got abroad, and the 
opposition to the apostle of the Gentiles had become 
strengthened and defined. How could his adversaries 
accept declarations such as that of I Corinthians ix. I, 
where Paul asserts his apostleship and founds it on his 
vision of Christ ; or those of chap. xv. i-ii, in which, 
while calling himself the last of the apostles, unworthy 
even to be called an apostle, he adds that by the grace 
of God he had laboured more than all the rest ? 

We see how a wider and more important question 
became involved in that of the incestuous person. 
Paul was accused of extravagant boasting. From a 
distance, said they, he speaks loudly and confidently ; 
but he takes care not to come to Corinth, for his 
presence is ineffectual. Contrary to all reason and 
justice, he is usurping apostolic privileges. He is not 
competent for such an office, and has not been called 
to it (i/cavoTi]?, chaps, iii. and iv.). His wish is to lord 
it over Christ's heritage, in order to make his gain 
out of it (chap. xi. 7-12). He thinks only of vexing 
and destroying them (chap. xiii. 8-10). He is an 
intruder, a false brother among the Messianic people, 
one to be held in distrust (chap. xi. 21-23). We 
understand thus why it is that the whole discussion in 
this epistle, from first to last, turns on Paul's apostolic 
authority. He himself had raised this question in 
his first letter, by his mode of dealing with the case 
of the incestuous person. 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. K 



That such was the course of events is highly pro- 
bable on logical and intrinsic grounds ; and it is 
further apparent from all that occurred between the 
two existing letters, and from the satisfactory way in 
which the obscure allusions, so numerous in the second, 
are thus explained. For a long time we refused to 
admit the existence of a lost letter written between 
the first and second epistle. A new study of the text 
has modified our previous opinion, and we consider 
that there was a letter written before the second 
epistle, just as there was another one before the first ; 
so that the apostle must have written at least four 
epistles to the Church of Corinth, of which the second 
and fourth alone remain to us. 

The loss of the third is the more to be regretted, 
because it went to the very root of the conflict at 
Corinth. Paul wrote it in a spirit of profound grief 
and indignation, that dictated stern language. He 
had written with tears, and in great distress of mind ; 
and when the letter had gone, he went so far as to 
regret some expressions which were, possibly, ex- 
treme 1 (chap. vii. 5-12). What effect would it produce 
at Corinth? For some time this anxiety seems to 
have left him no rest. It was on this account that he 
sent Titus immediately after, or perhaps at the same 
time, to watch the events that might occur, and to 
re-establish harmony and confidence between himself 
and the Church. He awaited his return with impa- 
tience, and not finding him at Troas, went to meet 
him in Macedonia. It is evident that the character- 

1 May not the exaggerated character of this letter, and the 
kind of regret which Paul has expressed, explain why it has not 
been preserved ? 



i?o THE AFOSTLE PAUL. 

istics of the letter to which Paul so often refers in our 
second epistle, do not properly belong to the first, 
which is highly pacific in tone and calm in its tenor, 
and, on the whole, kindly in feeling towards the 
Corinthians. 

In the first epistle, moreover, Paul commended 
Timothy, his earlier messenger, to the Corinthians 
(i Cor. iv. 17 ; xvi. 10, 11). Timothy, who was still 
very young, had not sufficient authority to allay 
the storm ; he was overmatched by the revolt, and 
returned to tell Paul of the fresh complications that 
had arisen. At the beginning of the second epistle, 
we find him with the apostle ; but it would be 
strange, unless some letters were written in the 
interval, that Paul says nothing of his return, or 
of the anxious tidings he had brought. It is Titus, 
on the contrary, who is now mentioned ; indeed Paul 
speaks of him only to the Corinthians. We cannot, 
therefore, question the existence of the lost letter, to 
which he refers more than once (chap. ii. 1-3 and 9) 
What did it contain ? It would be a daring thing to 
attempt its reproduction. We do not consider that 
M. Hausrath, who thinks he has found it in the last 
four chapters of the second epistle, has been happy 
in this hypothesis. 1 But the vehement, the ironical 
and impassioned tone of these last pages represents 
very fairly, I believe, that of the lost letter. 

We may add, in accordance with chap. ii. 9 and 
chap. vii. 7, 11, 13, that in this letter Paul gave ex- 
press orders, and demanded satisfaction. Clearly, 
the crisis was a serious one ; it was a sort of ultimatum 
that Paul had sent. We can understand the anxiety 

1 Der Yiercapital Brief des Paulas an die Corinther. 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 171 

with which he awaited the news that Titus was to 
bring him, and the joy and gratitude which it ex- 
cited. The two first chapters of the epistle are like 
a sigh of relief, a cry of deliverance (chap. ii. 14). 
Titus, armed with the severe letter of Paul which had 
preceded him, has brought the rebels and disturbers 
to reason. The man who had grossly outraged Paul 
has been punished ; and the apostle now declares 
himself satisfied, and wishes him to be forgiven. 
Though the Corinthians "had been mortified by his 
remonstrances, their trouble led to repentance, and to 
the display of a more ardent affection. The victory, 
in short, remained with Paul. 1 



1 I do not now feel quite satisfied with this historical recon- 
struction of the crisis which occurred in the Church of Corinth. 
That there was a letter, now missing, which came between the two 
existing epistles, still seems to me uncontestable ; but there was 
something more. These passages, when studied more closely, 
compel us to admit further a visit made by Paul to Corinth 
during the interval that elapsed between the two canonical 
epistles. Three passages in the second letter to the Corinthians 
establish the fact of this visit : (1) In 2 Cor. xiii. 1 and 2, the 
words rptrov rovro epxopto.t, and especially the phrase ws irapwv 
to Sevrepov, further followed by ort lav e\6u> thro 7nxA.11/, cannot 
be explained by a merely projected journey, but imply a second, 
which was actually accomplished. (2) The same conclusion 
is equally apparent from 2 Cor. xii. 14 : 'iSou rptrov rovro 
eroLfAtos e^o) iXOetv Trpos v/xa?, kcu ov KaravapKrjcro). The assertion 
contained in this latter verb can only be explained on the sup- 
position of a second sojourn of Paul at Corinth, before he wrote 
the present epistle. (3) Paul, in his first letter, promised the 
Corinthians a speedy visit (1 Cor. xvi. 7 and iv. 21), and asked 
the faithful themselves to decide whether he should come with 
a rod of chastisement, or with the spirit of gentleness and love 
to console them. (4) Lastly, the language of 2 Cor. ii. 1-3 
proves that this visit had taken place, and had been full of 



172 THE APOSTLE PAUL, 

II. Paul's Remonstrance. 

It was in order to secure and strengthen this new 
situation, even more than to prepare for the collection 
on behalf of the poor at Jerusalem, that the apostle 
took up his pen once more. Rightly to understand 
the tenor of the second epistle, apparently so strange, 
we must form a clear conception of the circumstances 
which called it forth. The crisis which had occurred 
at Corinth had come to a relatively favourable issue ; 

sorrow. The words, to jxij -rvaXiv iv Xxnrrj iXOetv 7rpos {yxas, 
cannot refer to the occasion when Paul was evangelizing 
Corinth for the first time. The Church had not then given him 
any disappointment ; for it did not as yet exist. The reference 
here is to a second, and quite recent visit, of which he retained 
a very sorrowful recollection, including it among the most bitter 
trials of his apostolical career. It will be observed, in fact, that 
Paul speaks in the same tone of this visit as he does of the 
missing letter, written immediately afterwards, under the shock 
of distress which it occasioned. 

What, then, had taken place at Corinth during this visit ot 
Paul? There are two passages which throw some light upon 
this question : 2 Cor. ii. 5-1 1 ; vii. 11, and especially ver. 12. It 
appears from these statements that Paul had been personally 
and directly affronted. There is some one at Corinth who in 
his own presence, and before the whole Church, has done him 
serious injury. The words tov dSt/ayo-avros and tov aStKrjOevros 
of 2 Cor. vii. 12 are only naturally applicable to Paul and the 
man who had affronted him. They could not refer, in this con- 
text, to the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v. and his father, as is 
generally supposed. How could Paul, in that case, have had 
anything to forgive ? See 2 Cor. ii. 10. How could he say 
in the same passage that he had been directly wounded : e/xe 
\e\v7rrjKev, iv Xvinj (chap. ii. 1-5) ? And how, in the last place, 
if it were still a question of the man whom in his first letter 
he had delivered to Satan (1 Cor. v. 5), could he now write about 
him so considerately in 2 Cor. ii. 7, prj 7rcos rfj TrepuraoTepa 
\v7irj KaraTro6rj ) — and yet more in ver. 1 1 ? 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTH LANS. 173 



but it left the Church still greatly divided. The 
majority had returned to the apostle's side, with the 
liveliest tokens of regret and affection. But besides 
this majority, there still remained a minority, obsti- 
nate in its hatred and hostile in its intentions. The 
letter, like the position of affairs, has a twofold aspect. 
Paul could not have written it on any other plan. 
He first addresses himself to the faithful majority, and 
pours out the feelings which fill his soul towards them. 
He has never written anything more touching (chaps. 



The affair of the incestuous person may indeed, as we explain 
above, have helped to raise in the Church the great question, 
now under discussion, of Paul's apostolic dignity and authority ; 
but it was not this man who had insulted Paul ; and the vague 
expression ns, 6 tolovtos, which Paul always uses to designate 
his adversaries, and which occurs again and again in the same 
epistle (chaps, x. 7 and xi. 4), must be applied to some influential 
person in the Church of Corinth, probably one of the Judaizers 
come from Palestine with letters of recommendation (2 Cor. 
iii. 1), who specially claimed to be of Christ according to the 
flesh and to speak in His name (chap. x. 7). It was this same 
person who said that, though Paul's letters were strong and 
weight} 7 , his presence was ineffectual. He it was who publicly 
affronted Paul (dSi/cr/crai/Tos, chap. vii. 12), and had occasioned 
him so much distress (el Se tis AeAumyKcv, chap. ii. 5). 

We can therefore reconstruct, with some degree of proba- 
bility, the drama which was enacted at Corinth during Paul's 
second visit. The apostle had hastened thither to counteract 
the manoeuvres of the emissaries from Judaea or Syria, who were 
undermining his authority. Debate and conflict arose. The 
Church assembled; and both Paul and his adversaries were 
present. His words were of no avail ; the Church yielded in 
part to the specious arguments and more facile eloquence of 
the Judaizers. One of them, doubtless their leader, denounced 
Paul openly ; he accused him of falsehood, treated his visions 
as chimerical, and reproached him with living at the expense of 
the Churches. The confidence of the Corinthians was shaken. 



174 • THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



i.-viii.). Then, after briefly arranging the matter of 
the collection (chap, ix.), he turns abruptly to the 
hostile minority, and mercilessly chastises it with the 
lash of his irony. Nothing more biting than these 
last pages has proceeded from his pen (chaps, x.-xiii.). 
This is the natural explanation of the two, most dis- 
similar portions of his letter. Nothing bridges the 
transition from one to the other, because there was 
nothing in the facts to furnish a point of connexion. 

Heartbroken by this affront, and feeling utterly helpless, Paul 
left Corinth. But a few days later, pen in hand, the apostle 
regained his power, and wrote a crushing letter, the vehement 
tone of which he seems at first to regret (2 Cor. vii. 5-9). This 
letter, further supported by the oral mission of Titus, seems 
with the majority to have prevailed over the calumnies and 
intrigues of his adversaries. The insult had been public ; it 
was publicly withdrawn ; and the offender was so earnestly dis- 
owned and censured by the majority of the believers, that Paul 
is now the first to ask mercy on his behalf. 

These events, taken fully into account, demand a slight modi- 
fication in our chronology of the two epistles. At first we had 
only allowed for an interval of five or six months between them, 
reckoning from about the Passover of 57 to the autumn of the 
same year. This space of time is too short for the occurrence 
of all the facts that we have now come to recognise. We must 
place the first epistle a year earlier, which is easily done, and 
date it at the Passover of the year 56 A.D., leaving the second 
in the autumn of 57 (written in Macedonia). This gives an 
interval of eighteen months between them, which is amply 
sufficient. 

Let us restate the chronological order and development of the 
inner history of the Church of Corinth during this period. 

1. Towards the end of the year 55, and upon his arrival at 
Ephesus, Paul writes his first letter to the Corinthians, now lost, 
but referred to in 1 Cor. v. 9. The heterogeneous fragment of 
2 Cor. vi. 14— vii. 1 is doubtless one of its pages, which survived 
through having strayed into the context where it is found at 
present. 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 175 



Notwithstanding their marked difference of tone 
and manner, the two parts are none the less linked 
together by a large unity of thought and aim. It 
is the same adversary that Paul combats in both 
parts, the Judaic spirit which strove by its pretensions 
to extinguish the Christian spirit, — that bondage to 
the letter which still prevailed over the liberty of the 
Gospel. He resumes, therefore, the warfare begun by 

2. In the winter of 55-56 : the answer of the Corinthians to 
Paul (1 Cor. vii. 1), the visit made to Paul at Ephesus by the 
members of Chloe's household (1 Cor. i. 11) and by other 
Corinthian Christians (1 Cor. xvi. 17), and the discussion in the 
Church on the merits of the different preachers (1 Cor. i. 12-14). 

3. About the passover of the year 56 : Paul's second letter — 
our first epistle to the Corinthians, and the mission of Timothy 
to Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 10). 

4. Arrival of the Judaizing emissaries with letters of recom- 
mendation (2 Cor. iii. 1). Great disturbance in the Church. 

5. In the autumn of the year 56, Timothy reports his failure 
to Paul, who sets out for Corinth and spends one or two months 
there. 

6. The public conflict between Paul and his adversaries. 
Paul is worsted, and leaves heartbroken. The Church seems 
lost to him. 

7. In the spring- of the year 57: Paul's third letter to the 
Church of Corinth, now lost (2 Cor. ii. 4 and vii. 5-9). 

8. About the same time, the mission of Titus. 

9. In the spring of 57 : the meeting of Titus and Paul in 
Macedonia (2 Cor. vii. 5). 

10. Autumn of 57 : Paul's fourth letter (from Macedonia), 
our second epistle to the Corinthians. 

11. Winter of 57-58 : Paul's third visit to Corinth, a happy 
and peaceful one ; for it was then that he wrote his great letter 
to the Romans. 

Thus reconstructed, this dramatic chapter of the apostle's 
life enables us, better than anything else, to understand what 
that life was really like,— Note of the author written for this 
edition. 



176 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

the epistle to the Galatians, and carries it a stage 
further. The battle is no longer about circumcision, 
but concerns the ministry of the old, and that of the 
new covenant. 

In the third and fourth chapters Paul addresses 
himself to this fundamental question. The two cove- 
nants are powerfully described (chap. iii. 6, 7) — one 
as the letter, dead in itself and imparting death ; the 
other as the spirit, having life in itself and giving life ; 
one resulting in condemnation, the other in salvation. 
If the first was glorious, notwithstanding its limited 
and transitory character, how much more so is the 
second, which is not only called to have its phase of 
glory, but to abide in it (to /carapyov/nevoy &ia ho^r^ 
. to juivov ev &6!;r), chap. iii. 11). 

To the two covenants there correspond two minis- 
tries (hiaicovia ypd/jL/jLCLTos, Sta/covca irvev/jLCLTOs). The 
first was that of Moses, whose face was veiled before 
the children of Israel, that they might not see its 
glory pass away. But the ministry of the new cove- 
nant, radiant with permanent glory, is manifested 
before all eyes without veil or reservation, because 
its glory is progressive ; for where the Spirit of the 
Lord is, there is entire confidence (irapprjcrla), — a 
perfect liberty, a continual glorification (chap. iii. 
12-18). 

Here Paul introduces the dramatic contrast occu- 
pying the fourth and fifth chapters, between the 
inner might and glory of his ministry, and the 
humiliations and outward infirmities, which while 
they seem to eclipse it, only serve to reveal its 
Divine power more adequately. " We have this trea- 
sure in an earthen vessel, that the exceeding power 
of its virtue may be ascribed to God, and not to us. 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 177 



We are afflicted on all sides, but not overwhelmed ; 
always in distress, yet never brought to despair ; 
persecuted, but not conquered ; tempest-tossed, but 
not submerged ; always bearing in our body the dying 
and mortified image of the Lord Jesus, that in the 
death of our flesh might also shine forth the vigour 
of His life." 

Not merely do trial and reproach fail to injure our 
ministry, they even commend it, and are the Divine 
seal by which it may be recognised. The Christ 
whom we serve is not Christ according to the flesh, 
but the Christ who died and rose again. Thus every- 
thing that is glorious or powerful according to the 
flesh disappears from our ministry, as with Christ 
Himself, that the new life, the life of the Spirit, may 
be more fully manifested. " Thus we commend our- 
selves as ministers of God, by great patience, by 
sufferings, by trials, by the wounds we have received ; 
in prisons, in watchings, in weariness, in fastings ; 
through glory and dishonour, through renown and 
calumny. Treated as deceivers, and yet faithful ; mis- 
taken by men, and yet known of God ; ever dying, 
ever living ; always tried, yet always joyous ; poorest 
of the poor, yet enriching multitudes." These ad- 
mirable pages close with this touching appeal to 
the Corinthians : " Our mouth is open unto you, O 
Corinthians ; our heart is enlarged. You are not 
straitened in our affections ; recompense us in kind. 
Enlarge your hearts in turn " (chap. vi. 1 1). 1 

1 It is impossible to discover the slightest connexion between 
the 13th verse of chap. vi. and the totally different line of 
thought beginning in ver. 14. The same breach of continuity 
recurs between the first and second verses of the 7th chapter. 
If, on the contrary, this section (chap. vi. 14-vii. 1) be removed, 

12 



178 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



Chapters vii.-ix. revert to some details which had 
been too briefly explained at first, and to the collec- 
tion which had to be completed before Paul's return. 
The controversy with the Judaizers, which in the first 
letter was indirect and incidental, occupies, as we see, 
the whole of the second, and becomes keener and 
more urgent as the apostle proceeds. Now that he 
has disposed of the question of principle, Paul faces 
the accusations and calumnies directed against his 
own person by his adversaries. His long-repressed 
indignation bursts forth in a sudden explosion (chap. 
x. i). "I Paul myself exhort you once more with 
all gentleness, and with the patience of Christ, — I, 
so lowly and humble among you, so bold when absent ! 
God grant that when I come, I may not have to put 
forth my strength to bring to subjection those who 
represent me as walking according to the flesh." 

After refuting the assertions of his enemies, he in 
his turn attacks them. He draws a parallel between 
their ministry and his own, in which the most lashing 
irony and the bitterest indignation are mingled with 
a most delicate reserve. " Well, though at the risk of 
appearing foolish, I too wish to boast a little : you 
will easily endure it. I am about to speak not after 
the Lord, but as a fool : no matter ! since others sing 
their own praises, I too will sing mine. You who are 
so wise, can easily bear with fools! Whether one bring 
you into bondage, or devour you, or glorify himself, 
or strike you on the face, you bear it with admirable 

there is a most natural connexion between chap. vi. 13 and 
vii. 2. The exegetes are therefore quite right in regarding the 
paragraph which so untowardly interrupts the thread of the 
discourse as an interpolated gloss, or a fragment of one of Paul's 
lost letters inserted in the midst of the second epistle. 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 179 



patience. What would you have ? I say it to my 
shame — but I also have my weaknesses. Of what do 
they boast ? — I am a fool, but I too boast of the same. 
Are they Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites ? so 
am I. Are they servants of Christ ? (here my foolish- 
ness has no bounds) I am more so than they; in weari- 
ness, imprisonment, and wounds — in the endurance of 
suffering, I surpass them ! I have five times received 
from the Jews forty stripes save one. I have thrice 
been beaten with rods, and once stoned. Thrice have 
I been shipwrecked. I was a night and a day in 
the jaws of the deep. Wearying journeys, perils 
on the rivers, dangers of every kind — from robbers, 
from my fellow countrymen, from the heathen, in 
cities and deserts, on the sea, and among false 
brethren — labour, sorrows, vigils, hunger, thirst, cold, 
nakedness, — I have braved everything, endured every- 
thing. . . . But enough ! If I must needs glory, 
let me glory in my infirmities ! " As in the epistle to 
the Galatians, so here Paul yields none of his rights. 
He does not fear to place himself on a level not only 
with those false apostles who came to trouble the 
Churches (yjrevSaTroaroXoL, ipydrai SoXioi, fieraa-^r]- 
fjLdTi^ofievoi, eh azroaroXov^ XpiaTov, chap. xi. 13), 
but with those whose authority these others so much 
exalt, and whom he calls 01 virepXiav airoaidXot, the 
arch-apostles (chap. xi. 5). This expression of Paul's 
corresponds very well with those in the epistle to the 
Galatians, — gtvXoi, So/covvres. 

III. The Crisis in Paul's Soul. 

\\ hile there was occurring at Corinth that profound 
schism which alone can explain both the form and 
substance of the second epistle, an equally momentous 



i So THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



crisis had supervened in the great apostle's own soul. 
No external changes can account for all that we find 
in this letter ; it gives evidence of other occurrences 
no less momentous, which took place in the author's 
inner life. 

It is very remarkable that Paul's eschatological 
notions, which, as we have seen, are maintained to the 
end of the first epistle to the Corinthians, disappear 
— or, at least, are transformed — from the second on- 
wards. From this time he no longer hopes to witness 
the coming of the Lord within his lifetime. This 
glorious paronsia, which formed the horizon of his 
vision of the future, has been indefinitely postponed, 
and makes room for a darker and more sorrowful 
perspective. Instead of the appearance of Jesus, the 
apostle henceforward has the prospect of death and 
martyrdom before him ; and beyond this painful stage, 
the hope of being finally reunited to the Lord (2 Cor. 
v. 1- 10 ; Acts xx. 22-25 > Phil. i. 20, 21). 

This marked change in the Pauline eschatology 
took place in the interval between the two letters 
to the Corinthians. What has happened meanwhile ? 
The beginning of our second epistle shows us. The 
last months of Paul's stay at Ephesus and in Asia 
seem to have been the darkest and most difficult of 
his life. For the moment, his hopes and his spirit 
flagged. Everything seemed to conspire against him. 
After the defection of the Galatians, he had just 
heard' of the troubles in the Church at Corinth. He 
finds the same adversaries confronting him at Ephesus 
and furiously persecuting him. The care of all the 
Churches consumes him (2 Cor. xi. 28). He has no 
rest in his flesh ; he is afflicted on every side (egto&ey 
fiaX al > ^acodev (poftot, 2 Cor. vii. 5). 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 18 1 

Xor is this all. He has just incurred a mysterious 
danger in Asia, of exceptional gravity (2 Cor. i. 8). 
This trial, which the apostle does not explain more 
definitely, but which could not have been the riot of 
Demetrius and his workmen at Ephesus (Acts xix. 
30-41), surpassed all bounds, and exceeded his power 
of endurance {on Kad y virep^oIKrjv e/3aprj07]fiev inrep 
hvvajjiiv). He despaired of life. He carried within 
his soul a sentence of death. And now his unhoped 
for deliverance seems like an actual resurrection 
(chap. i. 8-10). 

The hero's indomitable courage, shaken for the 
moment by this terrible crisis, was soon re-established. 
But there was one thin^ which was not restored : 
the hope of seeing with his own eyes the triumph of 
the Gospel, the establishment of the Messianic king- 
dom, and the immediate paroiisia of the Lord. In this 
crisis his faith at length freed itself from the last 
bonds of traditional Judaism ; and Christian escha- 
tology escaped from the narrow limits of the escha- 
tology of the Pharisees. The spirit completes its 
triumph over the letter. 

Paul sees new prospects opening before him. He 
can no longer reckon on the intervention of the arch- 
angel and the celestial trumpet for the founding of 
God's kingdom. It will be established by the weakness, 
by the devotion and the sufferings of its messengers. 
The image of death, with which the apostle had not 
hitherto concerned himself, enters for the first time 
within the scope of his doctrine. 

In this season of anguish and distress, he seems to 
have had a clear vision of martrydom. He was to 
seal his preaching of the Gospel with his blood. The 
disciple, like the Master, can only triumph through 



1S2 THE APOSTLE PAUL, 



humiliation and suffering. But Paul's resolution is 
fixed. Henceforth he passionately devotes himself 
to this vision of the dying Jesus ; he experiences a 
new and indescribable pride, a joy blended with 
anguish, in renewing in his own body the martyrdom 
of his Master, in carrying it forwards by his personal 
sufferings and completing it by his death (tjjv veic- 
pcocnv tov 'Irjaov iv tgj aayfxart TrepicfrepovTe*;, 2 Cor. 
iv. io ; comp. Col. i. 24; Phil. i. 20; ii. 17 ; 2 Tim. 
iv. 6). Thus the apostle's momentary defeat is 
changed into a higher, and, this time, a decisive 
victory. 

From henceforth he is happy and contented ; his 
mind has discovered its true bent, and he now feels 
that the various elements of his faith are brought into 
full and perfect harmony. If the earthly future is 
darkened, shrinking and closing up before his gaze, 
in the heavenly future there is revealed to his soul 
a new, wide, and luminous prospect. The mournful 
conception of Sheol vanishes from his mind ; and with 
it the Messianic framework of the Jewish apocalypse 
gives way. Instead of the unconscious sleep of souls 
in the bosom of the earth, there emerges triumphant 
the Christian hope of the immediate reunion of the 
elect with the Saviour (2 Cor. v. 1-10). True, the 
struggle between the power of the Gospel and that of 
sin here on earth will be prolonged. Paul has no 
doubt that it will issue at last in the full triumph of 
Christ and His glorious advent ; but he no longer 
attempts to estimate the length, or foresee the phases 
of this great drama. Like Jesus, and with the same 
filial submission, he leaves in the hands of God the 
Father the destiny of His kingdom. The spiritual 
principle of Christianity everywhere prevails. Death 



THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. 183 



henceforth is completely vanquished and overcome 
by the Christian consciousness. 

We know with what a crushing effect this idea of 
death weighed upon the Jewish, as well as the heathen 
mind. In spite of the doctrine of the resurrection, 
fairly established in the popular belief as it appears 
from the time of the production of the book of Daniel, 
Hades, or Sheol, retained its shadows, and death its 
terrors. The soul of Jesus had shuddered on ap- 
proaching it. But the darkness speedily disappeared 
before the radiance of His faith ; and He had entirely 
triumphed over death, by His sense of perfect and 
indissoluble union with the Father. To die was, for 
Jesus, to return to His Father and His God (John 
xx. 17). But neither the first Christians, nor the first 
apostles, had appropriated to themselves this victory 
of the Master. Death was not less fearful to them 
than to the Jews. The Messianic reign that they 
were expecting was only to be realized upon earth ; 
they knew no other sphere of life. They were ex- 
pecting the coming of the Lord ; and when their 
friends died, they were deeply distressed on their 
account. This explains the anxiety of the Thessa- 
lonians about their dead — an anxiety which Paul 
endeavoured to soothe. In what manner ? He could 
only at that time direct their expectation and faith 
to the impending event of the coming of Jesus, and 
assure them that the dead will then rise first of all, 
and, with the living, share His triumph. Death still 
retained its appalling mystery ; it was only con- 
quered in hope, and as regards the future. 1 

I 1 But see 1 Thess. v. 10 : "Jesus died and rose again, that, 
whether we be waking or sleeping, we may live together with 
Him." Here is already a sense of indissoluble union with 



:84 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



In the second letter to the Corinthians already Paul 
comforts himself in a manner quite different from this, 
and more effectual. While the outer man succumbs 
to death, the inner man, whose principle of life is 
the Spirit of God Himself, is delivered from it. The 
trials which destroy the former only strengthen and 
glorify the latter. In proportion as the one decays, 
the other is renewed and reinvigorated (2 Cor. iv. 16). 
We sigh for the time when, above our mortal flesh 
condemned to die, we shall put on the celestial and 
spiritual body (eirevhvaaaOai). Though our earthly 
body be destroyed by death, we have yet in the 
heavens a spiritual body awaiting us ; so that, when 
disrobed of our earthly covering, we shall not be 
found naked, any more than those living at the re- 
surrection day (2 Cor. v. 3). So far, therefore, from 
fearing death, we should rather desire it. For while 
we are in the body, we are absent from the Lord : 
but out of the body, we are with the Lord. Death 
only despoils us of a perishable covering, to clothe 
us with an immortal body. For the Christian, there- 
fore, death is truly conquered ; it belies itself ; it is 
nothing more than a point of transition, the final 
crisis which accomplishes our eternal glorification 
(2 Cor. iv. 17). 

Thus regarded from the double standpoint of the 
conflict with Judaism and the development of the 
Pauline doctrine, we perceive how important in all 
respects is the place which is occupied in Paul's his- 
tory by the second letter to the Corinthians. 

Jesus, corresponding to that "sense of indissoluble union with 
the Father " by which Jesus triumphed over death. Comp. 
1 Cor. xv. 55, 56 (" God . . . giveth us the victory ") ; also 
John vi. 50, 51 ; viii. 51 ; xi. 25, 26.] 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 

THE epistle to the Romans completes and crowns 
the progress achieved by the apostle's mind 
during this stormy period. The ideas briefly sketched 
in the epistle to the Galatians, or merely thrown out 
incidentally in the two letters to the Corinthians, 
here present themselves firmly bound together and 
brought to a powerful unity ; they are dialectically 
established, and organized into a complete system. 

The struggle in which Paul was engaged enters upon 
a new phase, and for himself at any rate, approaches 
its issue. The tranquillity which seems to be attained 
in his mind and thoughts imparts a breadth and 
calmness to this last letter which the others did not 
possess. It is no longer a question of circumcision, 
or of the attacks made upon Paul's person or apostle- 
ship. Personal feelings and private quarrels are 
forgotten ; the question of principle about which the 
two parties were contending can now be seen in its 
full import. Fundamentally, indeed, the controversy 
is still the same ; but the apostle's doctrine, disen- 
tangled from external incidents, is raised to a higher 
level and attains a freer and fuller development. 
Escaping from the violent antithesis by which it was 
hitherto dominated, it tends towards a general and 

185 



IS6 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

culminating synthesis. Paul at last brings Judaism 
and Paganism within the scope of his contemplation. 
He is not content to contrast them with the Gospel, 
and to condemn them purely and simply ; he en- 
deavours to understand them in their historical func- 
tions and actual value, to assign them their due place 
as transitional but essential stages in the Divine plan 
of redemption. In this manner the new circle of 
Pauline thought is enlarged and completed. Having 
taken possession of the sphere of the conscience, it 
conquers the domain of history. The epistle to the 
Romans is the first attempt at what we should call, 
in modern phrase, a philosophy of the religious his- 
tory of mankind. 

Such appears to us to be the drift and character of 
this great letter. It is not a formal treatise of ab- 
stract theology, as our ancient theologians supposed ; 
neither is it an expressly controversial writing like 
the epistle to the Galatians, or the second letter to 
the Corinthians. The apostle, while designing to 
combat the same tendency and achieve its final 
overthrow, directs against it a more general and less 
passionate style of argument. He places the question 
on the ground of principle, and is not so anxious to 
get the better of his old opponents as to do full 
justice to the truth. The epistle to the Romans 
marks the exact point at which controversy resolves 
itself naturally into dogma. 

But we cannot hope to gain either a just appre- 
ciation or a full comprehension of this letter, unless 
we take exact account of the occasion which gave 
rise to it, and the aim by which it is inspired. Al- 
though Paul's doctrine is presented here in a more 
general and dialectical form, it would be a great 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 187 



mistake to look upon his letter as the work of a 
professed theologian, dictated by a purely speculative 
interest. Only the historical circumstances which pro- 
duced the epistle will enable us to understand it. 

I. The Church of Rome. 

Having arrived at Corinth shortly after his second 
letter to the Christians of that city, Paul stayed there 
some time, — about three months, according to the 
narrative of the Acts of the Apostles (xx. 2, 3). 
Doubtless his presence finally calmed the minds of 
the Corinthians, and confirmed his authority amongst 
them. At that time new and mighty projects were 
germinating in his soul. 

This last sojourn at Corinth marks the brilliant 
climax of Paul's apostolic career. The epistle to the 
Romans, which was written then, seems on the one 
hand to conclude and crown the first stage of his 
life and work, and on the other to prepare for and in- 
augurate the second. The great missionary who had 
undertaken to carry the Gospel to the ends of the earth 
here pauses a moment, mid-way in his career. Taking 
a double survey, he looks back along the road he 
has traversed and forward to that which he intends 
to follow. Already from Jerusalem to Illyria there 
stretched the numerous succession of Churches which 
seemed to mark the halting places in his long journeys. 
From Corinth at the eastern extremity, he now sees 
opened before him an equally wide field of activity 
towards the west. Before pushing into these new 
regions, he wishes to go up to Jerusalem once more, 
and take to the mother Church the offerings of the 
Gentile Churches, that by this means the distrust of 
the Christians in Palestine may be finally overcome 



1 88 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

and banished ; possibly also, desiring thus to make 
amends to some extent for the evil that he had 
formerly done to it. Then, leaving Syria, Asia, and 
Greece behind him, he intends to penetrate to the 
limits of the West, perhaps never more to return 
(Rom. xv. 22-29). 1 

With such a project in view, Rome of necessity 
was the object which in the first instance attracted 
and engaged the apostle's thoughts. The Church of 
this city afforded the most promising and convenient 
vantage ground for his new mission. In the centre 
of Italy, equally distant from Germany, Gaul, Spain, 
and Western Africa, Rome had the further advan- 
tage of being in direct line with the course which the 
apostle had hitherto pursued, thus linking the work 
he was about to undertake with that which he had 
already accomplished ; so that, in Paul's view, the 
Church of Rome was destined to become a mother 
Church, and to be for the West what the great cities of 
Antioch, Ephesus, and Corinth had been by turn for 
the East, alike the goal and starting point of his new 
missionary enterprises (Rom. xv. 24). 

The epistle to the Romans is nothing else but the 
first step in the execution of these vast designs. In 
announcing his impending arrival at the capital of 
the Empire, the apostle seeks to prepare his field of 
action, and to pave his way thither. A Christian 
Church had been in existence in Rome for some 
years, and it was of the first importance to secure 
its sympathy and support. This is the primary aim 
of the epistle to the Romans. Inasmuch as Paul 



1 Reuss, Geschichte der Heiligen Schriften des N.T., § 105 
[History of the Sacred Scriptures of the N,T., p. 96.] 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 1S9 

was bound to direct all his efforts towards this pur- 
pose, and made it his business to meet the feelings 
and special requirements of his readers, it is evident 
that his letter can only properly be explained by 
the position of the Church at Rome. There, and 
nowhere else, is the key to this epistle to be found. 

Unfortunately, opinion is far from being unanimous 
upon this capital point. Critics and expositors have 
long been divided into two hostile camps. Some 
insist that the Church of Rome was essentially Gentile- 
Christian, and quote in support of their assertion 
Romans i. 6 and xi. 17-24 — passages whose bearing 
and significance they perhaps exaggerate. Others, 
on the contrary, with Baur at their head, assert 
that it was essentially a Jewish-Christian Church, and 
openly hostile to Paulinism. From these two opposite 
conclusions there logically result two contradictory 
conceptions of the epistle. 

Those who look upon the Church of Rome as 
Gentile- Christian, can only regard Paul's letter as a 
strictly dogmatic exposition of his gospel, made with 
the object of elevating and confirming the faith of 
the Romans ; or, at most, of forearming them against 
the intrigues of the Judaizing teachers (chap. xvi. 17). 
According to this view, the dialectic exposition of 
the doctrine of Justification by Faith, which occupies 
the first eight chapters, forms the essential part of 
the apostle's letter. The ninth, tenth, and eleventh 
chapters are a mere historical corollary, having no 
direct connexion with the previous section, whose 
tenor and whose presence, from this point of view, 
it is impossible to explain. 

On the opposite theory, the relation of these two 
component parts of the letter are exactly reversed. 



igo THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Those who regard the epistle of the Romans as 
polemical, and addressed to an unknown or hostile 
Church, make these last three chapters, which, accord- 
ing to the first hypothesis, are disconnected with the 
rest, the central part and the essential basis of the 
letter. There only, according to these critics, is dis- 
closed the apostle's true intention, the object which 
in reality occupies his mind. His object is to justify 
the substitution of the Gentiles for the Jewish nation ; 
and the first eight chapters are therefore simply an 
introduction, preparatory to the burning question of 
the destiny of Israel. 1 

In point of fact, these two conceptions of the epistle 
to the Romans appear equally defective. They cut 
the epistle into two parts, whose connexion and 
unity are then entirely lost. It is very difficult, on 
the one hand, to regard the ninth, tenth, and eleventh 
chapters, charged with emotions so vivid, as being 
a mere appendix, foreign to the main body of the 
letter and unconnected with the state of opinion at 
Rome ; on the other hand, it is no less difficult to 
treat the first eight chapters as a preliminary intro- 

1 The first opinion, which was that of the greater number ot 
ancient interpreters, was taken up and maintained not long 
ago with great skill by M. Th. Schott : Der Romerbrief, seinem 
Endzweck unci Gedankengangnach ausgelegt. (Erlangen, 1858.) 
This work of Schott provoked a still more remarkable study 
by M. Mangold, Professor at Marburg : Der Romerbrief itnd 
die Anfange der romischen Gemeinde. (Marburg, 1866.) The 
latter adopts Baur's thesis, but with such corrections as to 
transform it. He seems to me to have proved decisively that 
the majority of the Christians at Rome were of Jewish origin. 
M. Godet, however, in his recent Commentary, has returned to 
the old opinion; and has even exaggerated it, to an extent that 
makes it wholly untenable. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 19.1 

duction. With so slender a body and so enormous 
a head, there would be something truly monstrous 
in the structure of the epistle. On the contrary, one 
of its great beauties is precisely the logical archi- 
tecture which distinguishes it. A harmonious agree- 
ment prevails throughout its various parts and details. 
True, we seek in vain for any obvious transition 
between the two sections referred to ; but have we 
not noticed a breach of continuity, at least as great, 
existing between the ninth and tenth chapters of 
2 Corinthians ? Paul's mind often takes these abrupt 
and violent turns, to the surprise and discomfiture 
of the superficial reader ; but we may rest assured 
that even then, so far from departing from the right 
path, it is pursuing its end more directly and eagerly 
than ever. 

Is it not obvious, for example, that the two halves 
of the epistle to the Romans are intimately connected 
at the bottom, and that the second without the first 
would have no foundation, while the first without the 
second would have no culmination ? Is it not the 
case that these three later chapters, treating of Jews 
and Gentiles under the state of grace, correspond 
with, and form a pendant to the first three, in which 
the apostle exhibited them both in a state of sin ? 
In view of this, how can it be doubted that the two 
portions of the epistle form an organic whole ? We 
must therefore endeavour to discover some method 
of understanding the letter to the Romans which will 
preserve its internal unity, and determine its precise 
bearing. 

To return to the Church at Rome. Its members 
were both of Jewish and Gentile extraction : this is a 
certain fact. Everything leads us to believe that the 



192 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

former constituted the great majority, and that in this 
sense the Church might be called Jewish-Christian. 
But does it follow from this that it was Judaizing, — 
distinctly hostile to Paul's gospel, and maintaining 
salvation through the rites of the law in opposition 
to salvation by faith ? We answer decidedly, No ; 
and Baur's error consisted in drawing this second 
inference from the former. 

If, as we shall see presently, the Church of Rome 
did not belong to Paulinism, certainly it was just as 
free from the bias of the teachers of Galatia or Corinth. 
Paul does not regard it as hostile, or even alien to 
himself. On the contrary, he considers this Church 
to be included in the field of action assigned to him 
(eOveacv, ev oh icrre kclI yfiei?, chap. i. 6). He regards 
himself as its debtor, and declares himself ready to 
impart his gospel to it (chap. i. 14, 15). He applies 
to its members all the titles that he gave to his 
Churches in Asia (kXtjtoi ^Irjcrov Xprarov, ayair^Tol 
Oeov, aryioi). He not only praises their faith, but 
gives thanks to God on their behalf, just as for the 
faith of the Thessalonians and Corinthians ; and as 
he had not done in writing to the Galatians. To 
view these words as a mere insinuating exordium, 
a sort of captatio benevolentice, is an injustice to Paul's 
character. To say that he has modified his way of 
looking at things and softened his views, is con- 
tradictory to the essential tenor of the epistle itself. 
We must recognise the fact that we have here a 
Church of Christians who cannot be placed in the 
same category with the Judaizers of Galatia or 
Corinth. The rest of the epistle accords with its 
beginning. The apostle's line of argument does not 
imply a declared hostility among his readers. There 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 193 

is no direct polemic. His design is to instruct, rather 
than refute ; to expound his gospel, to dispel or an- 
ticipate misconceptions, rather than to repel particular 
attacks. The stern warning given to the Gentile 
Christians (chap. xi. 17-24) does not, indeed, prove 
that these were in the majority ; but is it conceivable 
that Paul would address such words to a few friends 
of his own, lost in the mass of Jewish Christians 
openly hostile to them ? Neither are the weak 
(avOevovvTes) in the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters 
Judaizers of the same class as those of Corinth. But 
it is none the less true that Paul's appeal to the rest of 
the Church for tolerance and charity on their behalf, 
implies in it a considerable breadth of view. Any one, 
in short, who reads the fifteenth chapter attentively, 
will have difficulty in persuading himself that words 
like those could have been written to a Church which 
was confessedly hostile, and had made common cause 
with Paul's adversaries : " I exhort you by the Lord 
Jesus," he says in concluding, "to strive with me in 
your prayers to God, that I may be delivered from 
the rebels in Judaea, — that the offering I am taking to 
Jerusalem may be favourably received by the saints, 
and that I may come to you in joy and find refresh- 
ment and rest." Finally, if the fragment contained in 
chap. xvi. 17-20 belongs to this epistle, it would prove 
that the adversaries against whom Paul had formerly 
been compelled to defend himself, had not yet reached 
Rome ; he hoped in his letter to be beforehand with 
them, and to anticipate their wonted attacks. 

Are we to conclude from this that, the Church 
at Rome was a Pauline Church? That would be 
going far beyond the meaning of the passages just 
examined, to another extreme even less warrantable 

13 



194 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

than the former. If the Romans had attained the 
spiritual elevation of Paul, where would have been 
their need of such a long explanation and careful 
justification of his gospel ? Those who adopt this 
hypothesis are obliged to regard the epistle to the 
Romans as a dogmatic treatise, written with a purely 
speculative end. But besides the fact that Paul has 
never composed anything of that kind, it would be 
impossible then to establish any connexion between 
the epistle and the Church to which it is addressed, 
and to explain why this dogmatic treatise was sent 
to Rome rather than elsewhere. The explanation of 
Paul's attempt must be found in the state of the 
Church at Rome. Now the apostle himself tells us 
what he wishes to impart to the Romans, and con- 
sequently what in his view was still lacking to them : 
" I earnestly desire to see you, that I may impart 
unto you some spiritual gift, that you may be es- 
tablished " (Jva tl /i€Ta8to yapiayua v/ilv Trvev/JLarL/cbv 
et? to <jTr\piyQr\vai v/j,as, chap. i. 1 1). What are we to 
understand by this ^dpia/ia TrvevfLariicov, this donum 
spirituale ? If we reflect that in I Corinthians ii. 
10-14 Paul has given the irvevaa as the vital prin- 
ciple of the Christian consciousness, the source of his 
own liberty of faith and of his spiritual conception 
of the Gospel ; if we remember that in the above 
context he has distinguished between the Trvev/jLarifcol, 
judges of all things and free with respect to all, and 
the aapKLKol still in bondage, — and that, lastly, he 
designates the Gospel as he understands it by the 
neuter Trvev/iariKa, there can be no doubt that he 
must have intended by those two words a wider 
and more spiritual conception of the Gospel of Jesus 
and a clearer understanding of the intimate relation 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 195 

of the believing soul with the Spirit of God, which 
will make their faith stronger and more joyful and 
give it greater liberty. Does not the whole epistle 
reveal a persistent effort to raise the Christian faith 
of the Romans from a lower to a higher level ? 
Written to a distinctly Pauline Church, it would 
cease to be comprehensible ; the long disquisitions 
on the law, and the care with which Paul anticipates 
Judaistic objections are inexplicable. Still more per- 
plexing would be the justification which Paul feels 
it necessary to offer of his mission to the Gentiles 
and their entrance into the kingdom of God. The 
nature of the questions raised, the precautions taken, 
the general tone — everything in the letter implies 
not a hostile Judaizing Church, but one of Jewish 
parentage, in which however the great questions were 
not yet raised which for some years past had agitated 
the Christianity of the East. 

This peculiar and most remarkable position of the 
Church at Rome is accounted for by the history of 
its origin, and also by the comparative isolation in 
which it had existed until the arrival of Paul's letter. 
We have no reliable documents relating to the intro- 
duction of Christianity into Rome. But we may 
safely assume that here, as elsewhere, the Church 
had its rise in the Synagogue, and was only separ- 
ated from it by a violent rupture. It is probable 
that the allusion of Suetonius ( Vit. Clmtd., § 25), 
Claudius J udoeos impidsore Chresto assidtte tiimultuantes 
expulit, refers to the inevitable disturbances that broke 
out on this occasion in the Roman Jewry. This 
edict of Claudius was imperfectly or only temporarily 
carried into effect ; while the Christian community 
suffered from it, it was not thereby destroyed. It 



196 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 






continued to recruit itself from among the Jews and 
the numerous proselytes, without renouncing - Jewish 
ideas and customs. It was in the same position as 
that of the Churches of Syria, before the dissensions 
brought on by the great success of the Gentile 
mission. No apostolic teacher seems to have visited 
it, or to have given it any special and exclusive bias. 
It had been the spontaneous creation of the Gospel. 
Paul now encountered it in the field of labour which 
had fallen to his lot. Aquila and Priscilla had doubt- 
less drawn the apostle's attention to this already 
flourishing community, and encouraged him to write 
to it, acquainting him with the kindly simplicity 
of its disposition, and the deficiencies of its faith. 

We have followed the progress of the Judaistic 
agitation step by step from Jerusalem to Antioch, 
from Antioch to Galatia, from Galatia to Ephesus, 
and from Ephesus to Corinth. The Judaizing 
teachers only seem to have reached this last town, 
the limit of their progress westwards, in the year 
57, during the interval between the two epistles to 
the Corinthians. They cannot therefore have arrived 
at Rome, where, moreover, there was no Paulinism 
to combat. This Church had remained in the simple 
and un-theological faith of the primitive days. It 
was virgin, and therefore neutral soil, which might 
easily be claimed by the first occupant. It was most 
important to Paul that he should take possession of 
it, and not allow himself to be anticipated. He will 
therefore himself expound his gospel to the Church 
at Rome, before his adversaries come to present it in 
caricature. He will endeavour to raise the Romans 
to the level of his own faith, and win them to the 
cause of the Gentile mission ; or, at any rate, if that 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 197 

is too much success to hope from his letter, he will 
try by its means to secure a favourable reception for 
his gospel and his apostleship. Addressed to a Church 
like this, with this object in view, the epistle is its 
own explanation. Paul is not engaged in a con- 
troversy, for he is writing to brethren, not enemies ; 
he is attempting to justify his gospel and apostle- 
ship before a community which, reared as it was in 
Judaism, might find both difficult for it to accept. 1 

The crisis now in progress throughout the Christian 
Churches, by which the Jewish and Christian spirit, so 
united at the first, were growing more and more 
distinct and coming into violent collision, could not 
but occur at Rome. But the epistle to the Romans 
was not subsequent to this crisis ; on the contrary, it 
preceded and provoked it. It raised in that Church, 
for the first time, the great question of the abrogation 
of the law, and thereby marked a decisive epoch in 
its history. The Judaic spirit was to show itself here, 
as everywhere else, obstinate and implacable. Paul 
gained a few partizans, and made many adversaries. 
The Church became divided. The epistle to the 
Philippians, written three or four years later, shows 
us the breach accomplished (Phil. i. 12-18). Two 
(apparently authentic) passages in the second epistle 
to Timothy give us the saddest impression of Paul's 
position a few days before his death. He is alone, 

1 These considerations, I believe, afford sufficient refutation 
of the conjecture of M. Renan, who regards the epistle to the 
Romans as an encyclical letter addressed by the apostle to 
several Churches, but not more required by that of Rome than 
by any of the others. It might, indeed, only have been sent to 
the Roman community by way of exception ! (See his Saint 
Paul, Introduction, p. 72.) 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



in prison, betrayed by some, deserted by the rest 
(2 Tim. i. 15-18 ; iv. 9-18). Nevertheless, this victory 
of the Judaizing party did not destroy Paul's in- 
fluence at Rome. In the letter of Clement of Rome 
it appears again, still vigorous and profound. But it 
is time to return to the epistle itself. 

II. The Plan of the Epistle. 

To this Church, such as we have just described it, 
Paul had to explain two very important facts, and 
secure acceptance for them : the substitution in the 
new religious economy of the Gospel for the Law, and 
of the Gentiles for the people of Israel — the one the 
defence of his teachings the other the Justification of 
his apostleship. The essential contents of the dog- 
matic portion of the epistle are summed up in these 
two theses. The first eight chapters are the de- 
monstration of the former ; chapters ix.-xi. are the 
demonstration of the latter. From this general dis- 
position of the subject matter, it is very evident that 
the two parts are equally essential to the structure of 
the epistle to the Romans, and equally important. 
The one is the logical consequence of the other. 

Paul has formulated the fundamental thesis of his 
gospel in the 16th and 17th verses of the first chap- 
ter. He introduces it by the words ov yap kiraia- 
yyvopai to euayyeXtov, which express the apostle's 
courage and boldness not only in face of the con- 
tempt of the Greek and Roman world, but most of 
all when confronting the hostility and scorn of the 
Judaizing party. The Gospel which he proclaims 
before all, he well defines as a $vi>a/Ms Oeov, realizing 
the huccuoavvr) Qeov for the salvation (eh crwTrjpiav) of 
every believer, — of the Jew first, and also of the pagan. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 199 

This salvation is universal, just because it depends on 
faith alone — as it is written, The just shall live by faith. 
Whilst thus vigorously formulating the universal 
character of his doctrine, Paul carefully from the first 
avoids wounding the Jewish sentiment ; he accords 
priority to the Jew (^lovhalw irpwrov). This is no 
concession ; it is the recognition of the simple fact 
that the Jew, as the heir of the promises, was in the 
course of history called before the Gentile to enter the 
kingdom of God. 

Paul establishes this great thesis by an admir- 
able demonstration, in which we note four essential 
stages : 

1. Chapter i. 18-iii. 31. Entering upon a survey of 
the moral and religious condition of humanity, the 
apostle shows that there is no salvation for it apart 
from Christ. He sketches in broad outlines the cor- 
ruption of the heathen world, in which the just wrath 
of God is revealed, punishing sin through sin itself, 
unrighteousness by idolatry, and the latter by moral 
depravity (chap. i. 18-32). He then turns to the Jew, 
who has a better knowledge of the Divine law, but 
in practice keeps it still less; who condemns himself 
in condemning the Gentile, forgetting that external 
circumcision is nothing if the heart remain uncircum- 
cised (chap. ii. 1-29). 

At this point, Paul might already consider the 
basis of his doctrine as established ; but he is anxious 
to remove, or to anticipate an objection which will 
infallibly be made. Does it not seem like denying 
the privileges of the Jews, to put them on the same 
level as the Gentiles ? Hence the question with 
which the third chapter opens : What advantage, then, 
has the Jew ? Paul recognises his historical privi- 



200 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

leges. The Jew received the oracles of God ; and God 
is faithful, even towards men who are not so. But 
what is there in this belief to encourage such men, 
and to justify their unfaithfulness ? Would any one 
draw the impious deduction that unfaithfulness, if 
serving to glorify the will of God, ought not to be 
punished ? Would not this amount to saying, Let us 
do evil that good may come ? The sin of the Jew 
remains, therefore, as much as that of the Gentile. To 
make his demonstration still more impressive, Paul 
sums it up in terms which are all borrowed from the 
Old Testament. Jews and pagans, alike impeached 
by the Divine justice, have equal need of salvation 
of God (chap. iii. 9-20). Here the apostle resumes 
the thesis in which he summed up his gospel, and 
develops it in a more complete and exact manner 
(chap. iii. 21-26). All are deprived of the glory of 
God, but the righteousness of God has been mani- 
fested apart from the law. We are justified by a 
gratuitous act of grace, by means of the redemption 
that is in Jesus Christ — through faith in His blood — 
in order to manifest the righteousness of God. This 
is no longer revealed in mere punishment, as was the 
case under the law, but in justifying him that be- 
lieves. Vers. 27-31 deduce the consequences of this 
first demonstration of Paul's thesis. 

2. Chapter iv. The apostle could not stop short at 
this point. His opponents would still have adduced 
against his syllogisms the authority of the Old Testa- 
ment. He therefore changes the direction of his argu- 
ment, and in the fourth chapter endeavours to prove 
that the doctrine of justification by faith is at the 
very root of the old covenant, and has the evidence of 
Scripture in its favour (fiaprvpov/Jiivr) vtto tov vo/jlov real 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 201 

rcou irpo(j)r}T(x)v). Neither Abraham nor David was 
justified by works (chap. iv. 1-9). Abraham's faith 
was imputed to him for righteousness before he had 
received circumcision, which rite, so far from dispen- 
sing with faith, has from the first merely been its 
confirmation (vers. 10-12). Lastly, it was to faith 
that the promise was given, and through faith also it 
is realized. Abraham believed in God, who raises the 
dead, and addresses the things that are not as things 
actually existing ; for the word of God is, in fact, 
creative, and realizes by its own virtue all that it 
declares. In the same way we believe in God, who 
delivered Jesus to death for our sins and has raised 
Him again for our justification (vers. 13-25). 

3. Chapter v. With the fifth chapter begins a new 
development of the subject. In order to complete the 
demonstration of this principle of faith, Paul allows 
it to explain and justify itself by its spiritual fruits 
(vers. 1-11). It gives a new life, of which the believer 
is intensely conscious, manifesting itself in the peace 
which he enjoys before God, in patient endurance 
of tribulation, in the love filling his heart, and in the 
firm hope that sustains him, of which the outpouring 
of the Holy Spirit is the sure pledge. Then, review- 
ing the whole history of humanity and summing up 
all that he has just set forth, the apostle goes on 
to show the power of sin entering the world through 
Adam's transgression, developing there by degrees as 
an organic force, and bringing in its train the death 
which comes to all men. because all are sinners. But 
beneath this progress of humanity in sin and towards 
death, he points out a new progress proceeding from 
Christ, the second Adam, which fulfils itself in holiness 
and tends to life. "Where sin abounded, grace super- 



202 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

abounded ; that as sin reigned by death, grace might 
reign through righteousness unto eternal life, through 
Jesus Christ our Lord " (vers. 12-21). Thus Paul has 
demonstrated his thesis, first by dialectic reasoning, 
then by Scriptural authority, and then by the con- 
clusive evidence of experience and history. 

4. Chapters vi.-viii. Arrived at the culminating 
point of his demonstration, Paul again encounters the 
perpetual objection made to his gospel, the same 
that had been raised at Antioch and in Galatia, and 
which his last words could not fail to arouse. Is not 
this doctrine of an absolute grace, abounding over 
the sin of men in order to cover it, the ruin of all 
morality ? Will it not afford occasion and excuse 
for saying, Let us sin, that grace may abound ? This 
objection brings the apostle to the very core of his 
doctrine, and suggests the admirable exposition of the 
seventh and eighth chapters, the profoundest pages 
which he has ever written. He there defines with 
wonderful clearness the relation of the three terms, 
a/naprta, vo/xo^, %a/n?. This common objection does 
not touch the Christian ; for in his quality as a sinner 
he has been crucified with Christ. He left his sin in 
the grave of Jesus ; and has risen with Him to a new 
life, which belongs wholly to God (chap. vi. 1-11). 
Instead of being the slave of sin, he is now the slave 
of righteousness (vers. 12-23). 

But at the same time that he died to sin, he 
died also to the law ; he escapes by death from 
this second power, as from the first, for it only had 
dominion over him so long as he lived. But nozv 
he has died ! and if he is raised again, it is to obey 
not the old letter, but the new power of the Spirit of 
God to which henceforward he belongs (chap. vii. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 203 



1-6). Does that mean that the law is sin ? Far from 
it. But the law gives life to sin by making it known 
as sin, and actualizing it in the form of transgression. 
The function of the law is to awaken within us this 
painful consciousness of sin, and intensify it to the 
point of despair. Thus the law, owing to our flesh 
in which the power of sin resides, brings us death 
(chap. vii. 7-24). 

But at the very point where the law makes ship- 
wreck and we founder on death, there triumphs the 
almighty grace of God, manifest in Jesus Christ. 
Paul here explains, more fully than he did in the fifth 
chapter, the wonderful effects of this grace : absolute 
freedom from all condemnation (chap. viii. 1-4) ; 
efficient sanctification by the Holy Spirit (vers. 5—1 1) ; 
filial adoption by God (vers. 12-27) ; the triumph of 
faith amidst even the severest trials, through the firm 
hope of the glory which shall be revealed in us (vers. 
J 8— 39). Thus triumphantly ends the demonstration 
of Paul's first thesis. 

From this point, whither the logic of his doctrine 
and the impulse of his emotion have led him, he could 
not descend to the second thesis of his letter by any 
natural transition. It is useless, therefore, to look in 
the eighth chapter for anything which announces, or 
prepares for the developments to follow. The tran- 
sition does not lie in the words. It takes place in 
Paul's feelings, in the painful contrast which forced it- 
self upon him. In the midst of the joy with which his 
heart has just overflowed, he is seized with the thought 
that his people remain strangers to this covenant of 
grace. His joy changes suddenly to bitter sorrow, 
and it is with a heartfelt cry of distress (chap. ix. 1-5) 
that he begins the defence of his apostleship. In these 



20 4 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

three last chapters Paul is bent on one thing only 
— to make plain the agency of God in the religious 
revolution which has taken place, the issue of a plan 
which may seem unjust, but which increasingly vin- 
dicates itself as it is further unfolded. God is not 
bound to the Jewish people. If He rejects them now, 
in order to call the Gentiles, it is by a free decree of 
His sovereign grace. The Jews, moreover, have no 
right to complain ; they have only themselves to 
blame for their unbelief. But this rejection is neither 
absolute nor final ; if it brings about the conversion of 
the Gentiles, that in its turn will lead to the salvation 
of Israel. Such, in its historical sequence, is the 
universal plan of redemption. Where the Jews see 
nothing but painful contradictions, an insoluble enigma 
and dense darkness, the profounder insight of the 
apostle perceives and points out the glorious issue of 
the Divine plans. Hence the three essential stages 
in his argumentation — the absolute freedom of the grace 
of God, which justifies from the standpoint of the 
Divine will Paul's work among the Gentiles (chap, 
ix.) ; the unbelief of the fezvs, justifying to their own 
understanding the decree of God which abandons 
them (chap, x.) ; the final solution of this existing 
antithesis between Israel and the Gentiles, in the 
complete redemption of both (chap. xi.). 

I. Chapter ix. 6-29. Paul does not touch directly 
upon the question of the future of the Gentiles. His 
main point is to explain and reconcile his readers to 
the sorrowful fate of the people of Israel, who, with 
all their great privileges, continue strangers to the new 
covenant. The apostle starts with the principle that 
carnal descent from Abraham does not constitute a 
right to inherit the promise, but that this right 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 205 

depends solely upon the free, sovereign grace of God. 
Just as in the family of Abraham, Isaac was chosen 
and not Ishmael ; and in the family of Isaac, Jacob 
and not Esau ; so now from among the people of 
Israel this grace calls some to salvation, and leaves the 
rest to destruction (vers. 6-13). It is true that a grave 
objection is here raised. In punishing him whom 
He has hardened, is not God unjust? Several pass- 
ages in Scripture itself seem to confirm this accusation 
(vers. 14-18). Paul is content to repel it by abso- 
lutely refusing to man the right of contending with 
God, or of controlling His will (vers. 20, 21). God is 
free to create vessels of wrath to manifest the great- 
ness of His judgments, and vessels of mercy to mani- 
fest the infinite riches of His love. These vessels of 
mercy may be taken from any quarter, from amongst 
the Gentiles as well as the Jews. God may, accord- 
ing to the word of Hosea, call those His people who 
were not His people, — and according to that of Isaiah, 
reduce to a feeble remnant, to a small number of 
elect, the great multitude of Israel (vers. 24-29). 

2. Chapter ix. 30-x. 21. Hitherto Paul has only 
considered these dispensations from the absolute 
standpoint of the Divine sovereignty. But they have 
another aspect ; and from vers. 30-33 a new point 
of view is disclosed, in which human responsibility 
regains all its importance. Why, after all, should the 
Jewish people complain ? Is the judgment of God 
arbitrary ? Is not the persistent unbelief of Israel its 
immediate and historical cause ? Because the people 
obstinately sought righteousness by the works of the 
law, and despised that which comes by faith, therefore it 
is now rejected (chap. x. 1-1 1) . The Jew had the same 
opportunity as the Gentile. The mercy of God is the 



206 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

same toward all who call upon Him. But the differ- 
ence lies in this, that the Gentiles have believed the 
Gospel, while the Jews have always proved rebellious 
(vers. 1 1-2 1). 

3. Chapter xi. 1-32. Paul does not stop here. 
He will not leave his readers in a state of mournful 
resignation, dictated solely by a sense of the inevitable 
necessity of things. Beyond the darkness of the 
present, he desires to show them in the future the 
absolute triumph of the work of God. This is the 
design of the eleventh chapter. The apostle reminds 
them that the word of God is immutable, and that 
He cannot absolutely and finally reject His people. 
He saves even now a part of it. If the mass indeed 
is rejected, it is not that it may be eternally lost. This 
fall is in God's design a mode of bringing about the 
salvation of the Gentiles. But the salvation of the 
Gentiles, in turn, is intended to accomplish the full 
and perfect realization of the salvation of the Jews 
(vers. 1 -1 2). 

With this conviction, and in fulfilment of this 
Divine idea, the apostle labours with indefatigable 
zeal for the conversion of the Gentiles. As things 
are, it is the best thing he can do for his nation itself. 
He strives to excite it to jealousy, for he knows surely 
that it cannot perish. The Gentiles, indeed, should 
never forget that this people whose branches are now 
cut off, are none the less the holy root, the true olive- 
tree, on the trunk of which they are engrafted ; and 
that while its fall led to their adoption, this in its turn 
will yet more certainly lead to its restoration. Thus 
the ways of God justify themselves ; and thus the 
temporary oppositions and painful contradictions of 
the present are effaced, and disappear in the final 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 207 



unity and consummation of the redemption : " God 
has shut up all men in sin, that He might have mercy 
upon all ! " Is it surprising that the apostle, stirred 
by such lofty thoughts and so grand a vision, suffers 
his enthusiasm to burst forth at the last in a hymn of 
adoration in praise of the unsearchable wisdom of 
God ? (vers. 33-36.) The second victory won by Paul's 
dialectic is as great and final as the first. Not only 
has he justified his apostleship, by referring it to the 
Divine decree ; not only has he proved that he dero- 
gates nothing from the Jews, who are called to faith 
equally with the Gentiles ; but he has further shown 
that in reality he is indirectly serving, and effectively 
preparing for, the fulfilment of the destinies of the 
people of Israel. 

There is no need that we should analyse the hor- 
tatory portion of this epistle, the precepts and moral 
exhortations of which are the practical issue of the 
principles that Paul has just developed. We may 
say, however, that nothing in chaps, xv. and xvi. gives 
any ground for the doubts raised by Baur respecting 
their authenticity. Only, these later pages of the 
letter are in great disorder. The manuscripts entirely 
disagree with each other, and present strange pheno- 
mena. The epistle to the Romans, as now constituted, 
has four, or even five terminations : chap. xiv. 23, 
where we sometimes find intercalated the doxology 
of chap. xvi. 25-27 ; then chap. xv. S3 \ chap. xvi. 20 ; 
xvi. 24 ; and the actual termination, chap. xvi. 25-27. 
Of all the hypotheses which have been assumed to 
explain these details, that of M. Renan still seems to 
me the best. According to this, several copies of the 
letter were made and sent to the different Churches, 
with appropriate additions from Paul himself ; one, in 



2o8 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



particular, to Ephesus, to which may have been added 
the special note preserved in chap. xvi. 1-20. 

This rapid analysis exhibits the new features of 
the epistle to the Romans and the theological pro- 
gress accomplished since the letters to the Galatians 
and Corinthians. The Pauline doctrine has at last 
attained its unity. The apostle is no longer satisfied 
with contrasting the Gospel and the Law ; whilst re- 
jecting the yoke of the latter, he goes further, and 
finds the Law fulfilled in the Gospel. In the same 
way, though he shows how the Gentiles take the place 
in the kingdom of God which the unbelieving Jews 
left vacant, he does not stop short at this contrast ; 
he feels the necessity of explaining to himself, as 
well as of justifying to others, this mystery in the 
plan of God. The necessary consequence of the 
Jews' rejection is to bring the Gospel out of the 
narrow circle of Judaism and spread it to the ends of 
the earth. But in this general conversion of the 
Gentiles, Paul only sees a new method by which God 
designs to bring back the people of Israel in their 
turn into the covenant of grace. Here again, review- 
ing the conflicts of history, his doctrine attains a final 
reconciliation. In this unity it finds repose. From 
this culminating point it surveys the progressive evo- 
lution of the plan of redemption, and of the destinies 
of humanity. 

God has shut up all men into disobedience, that He 
might have mercy upon all. This great saying, which 
closes and crowns our epistle, is the keystone of the 
arch in the apostle's structure. Oneness and equality 
in sin, oneness and equality in redemption : these 
words sum up both the leading idea and the entire 
plan of this great work. From this historical point 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 209 

of view, the two portions of the epistle, which usually 
have been merely placed in juxtaposition, are blended 
together and recover their profound unity. While 
the first shows us the fall of humanity and its virtual 
uplifting in Jesus Christ, the second, still on the same 
lines, exhibits the progressive realization of the King- 
dom of God in history, up to the point where it 
embraces all humanity. The religious philosophy 
broadly sketched in the epistle to the Galatians, is 
here defined and completed. 

Viewed in the light of this final unity, all the inter- 
mediate stages through which the Divine conception 
passes in its fulfilment, in the very nature of things 
appear but transitory. We understand them alike 
in their historical necessity and their subordination, 
— in their essential relativity. Only the short-sighted 
could suffer themselves to be arrested or driven to 
despair by the inevitable antagonisms and conflicts. 
The true believer foresees the final reconciliation, and 
knows that all these struggles really serve to fulfil 
God's design. The apostle had to win acceptance, in 
minds still fettered by Judaism, for two facts equally 
revolting and equally painful — the abrogation of the 
Law by the Gospel, and the substitution of the 
Gentiles for the Jews in the Kingdom of God. How 
could he succeed better than by directly referring 
these two facts to the Divine will, and showing them 
to be essential stages in God's eternal plan ? 

We may say, therefore, that Paul's letter is pre- 
eminently a work of synthesis and reconciliation. We 
must not, however, go too far ; we will not, with some 
theologians, speak of concessions, of advances made 
by the apostle towards his adversaries, of a Paulinism 
which is not so strict as that of the epistle to the 

14 



210 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



Galatians. Such an opinion could only be held by 
superficial readers, who judge from first impressions 
and do not attempt to analyse the epistle. None 
of Paul's letters sets forth with greater profundity or 
with more rigorous logic his most cherished ideas. 
His doctrine is rounded and completed, but not 
modified. It reduces to unity the two terms of that 
problem which had long disturbed it. Though we 
speak of reconciliation and of synthesis, it is of that 
logical reconciliation of his various ideas that must be 
sought by every earnest thinker, and of the final 
synthesis in which alone the mind can find repose. 

Hence the admirable harmony, the calm sense of 
power which distinguish this epistle above all the 
others. A perfect equilibrium prevails in it from 
beginning to end. The balance is always justly held 
between Jew and Gentile. If the Gentile is corrupt, 
the Jew is no less guilty. By different routes they 
arrive inevitably at the same condemnation {oh yap 
eanv SiacrroX/], chap. iii. 22). United in sin, they con- 
tinue united in their redemption. Is God the God of 
the Jews only, is He not also the God of the pagans? 
(chap. iii. 27-30.) There are only two humanities — 
the one sinful, descended from Adam, to which all 
belong ; the other redeemed and sanctified, the issue of 
Christ, the second Adam, to which all ought to belong. 
This equilibrium is still more striking in chaps, ix., 
x., and xi. Paul not only proves that the advantages 
of the one party are not acquired to the detriment of 
the other, but that neither obtains any grace which 
will not in the end redound to the benefit of all. If 
the Jews received the promises, it was that they 
might preserve them and transmit them to the Gen- 
tiles ; and if the Gentiles enter into the new covenant, 



THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS. 21 1 



their conversion is to lead to that of the Jews. In 
the same way the apostle entreats the weak to respect 
the strong, and exhorts the strong to support the 
weak (chaps, xii., xiv., xv.). For blind rivalries he 
substitutes everywhere fraternal solidarity, and for 
intestine conflicts organic unity. 

This is the culminating point which the Pauline 
theology has now attained. From the psychological 
sphere, where it discovered and established its funda- 
mental principle, it has risen to the wide sphere of 
history, and there attains its full expansion. It pauses 
a moment to contemplate and admire the onward 
progress o the plan and the revelations of God. 
But at this height it has already reached its critical 
point, where the philosophy of history changes of 
necessity into speculative theory. As yet it does not 
pass this limit ; but remains within the horizon of 
time. It even declares the wisdom of God unfathom- 
able, and the secret of His ways impenetrable ! But 
may it not attempt to gain some glimpse of them ? 
Shall it refrain from seeking to unveil at last the meta- 
physical principles implied in its previous develop- 
ments ? May it not crown the edifice so laboriously 
constructed ? 

The inherent logic, the natural bias of the apostle's 
mind, was to lead him to climb this last summit. 
The new events and the important changes about to 
take place in his own history, and in that of his 
Churches in Asia, will soon furnish the occasion for 
this. In the epistles of the Captivity Paul's inde* 
fatigable intellect attains its final goal, 



BOOK IV. 

THIRD PERIOD: THE PAULINISM OF 
LATER TIMES. 

From 58 A.D. to —{?) 

WITH the apostle's captivity begins the last 
epoch of his life. The letters usually referred 
to this period present us with a new type of doctrine 
as distinct from that of the great epistles as the latter 
was from primitive Paulinism. The striking antithesis 
between the Law and the Gospel formulated during 
the struggles of the preceding period is found here in 
a qualified and more general form, though it has not 
wholly disappeared (Phil. iii. 2, 3 ; i. 12-18). The 
Judaistic opposition seems relegated to the back- 
ground. Errors of another, but no less dangerous char- 
acter, threaten the apostle's work in Asia., and evoke 
a third and broader development of his doctrine. 

Before entering upon the exposition of this last 
phase of Paul's teaching it is necessary, therefore, to 
define clearly the entirely new circumstances in which 
the apostle is now placed. 



CHAPTER I. 

THE ADDRESS AT MILETUS.— APPEARANCE OF THE 
GNOSTIC ASCETICISM. — NEW EVOLUTION IN 
PAUL'S THEOLOGICAL DOCTRINE. 

THE farewell address delivered by the apostle at 
Miletus to the elders of the Church at Ephesus, 
forms the natural transition from the second period 
of his life to the third (Acts xx. 13-35). 

Paul left Corinth a few days after the despatch of 
his letter to the Church at Rome (Rom. xv. 25 ; comp. 
Acts xx. 3). He was going up to Jerusalem. His 
journey through Macedonia and along the shores of 
Asia Minor was simply a long series of farewells. 
Paul accomplished it in great anxiety of mind and 
under the most gloomy forebodings. Vainly did his 
friends, who shared his fears, endeavour to shake his 
resolution. He obeyed the inward call of God ; he 
was bound in conscience (Acts xx. 22). His hour 
had come. This journey reminds us of the last 
journey of Jesus to Jerusalem. At the end of his 
career the disciple, like the Master, was to undergo 
his passion. The tenderness of his heart, his serene 
faith in the midst of sorrow, his submissive and firm 
obedience, are strikingly exhibited in his pathetic 
farewell to the pastors of Ephesus. 

The address at Miletus has a still greater historical 

214 



THE LATER PAULINISM. 215 

significance. The apostle was affected not only by 
the crisis about to take place in his own life, but by 
the changes which he already foresaw in the destiny 
of his Churches. The Judaistic opposition had spent 
its first fury, and no longer seemed very formidable. 
A new crisis was developing. / know, said the 
apostle, that after my departure rapacious zvolves will 
attack you, and will not spare the flock ; from the 
midst of you will men arise uttering perverse things 
(\a\ovvT€<s 8i€<TTpafi/jt,iva) to draw the disciples after 
them (Acts xx. 29, 30). It is very evident that these 
rapacious wolves, these false teachers coming actually 
from the midst of the Gentile Christian Churches, are 
no longer the Judaizing teachers with whom we 
have become familiar. What can their distorted talk 
be, but an unnatural perversion of the Gospel itself, 
tortured from it by their false wisdom ? There is an 
obvious allusion here to the modes of interpretation 
familiar to Gnosticism. Some critics, it is true, have 
only brought forward this allusion as an argument 
against the authenticity of the Address itself, or at 
least against the fidelity of the narrator. The argu- 
ment would be very strong, if this indication of the 
concealed presence of the Gnostic leaven and its 
hitherto secret working were an isolated fact. But 
there are other considerations, more explicit and less 
disputable than this, which serve to confirm and 
justify these predictions as coming from Paul's mouth. 
Let us return to the epistle to the Romans. Let 
us ask ourselves who were the weak members of this 
Church, whom Paul describes in chapter xiv, and 
towards whom he preaches charity and tolerance? 
No doubt they were connected, more or less closely, 
with Judaism. It was from Judaism, and not from 



2i6 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



the Pythagorean philosophy, that their scruples and 
asceticism were derived. But they must not be con- 
founded with the Judaizing Christians of Galatia and 
Corinth, or even identified with the Judaizers of 
Rome as a body. These Christian ascetics who insist, 
not on circumcision and Pharisaic observances, but 
on certain abstinences, are a new development, 
radically different from primitive Judaeo-Christianity. 
They neither eat meat nor drink wine, living only on 
vegetables. Where shall we find the origin of this 
asceticism ? Ritschl, not without some show of 
reason, regards it as a result of Essenism, the spirit 
of which was already creeping into the Church. Be 
that as it may, this practical asceticism had its basis 
either in a philosophical dualism, or in an interpreta- 
tion of Scripture analogous to that employed by the 
Ebionites to justify the same abstinences. 1 But at 
Rome this ascetic morality seems to have propagated 
itself without the dogmas which justified it. Practice 
had anticipated theory. That is why the apostle, 
while condemning the principle of action adopted by 
these weak members [ireireLaixai iv Kvpiw 'Irjaov on 
ovSey tcoivbv hi eavrov), does not trouble himself to 
contend with them, and shows them the indulgence 
which is due to every scrupulous conscience. Later 
on, at Colossae, the two elements of theory and 
practice are found in combination. 3 The tendency, 

1 See Epiplianius, H ceres., 30. 15. 

- Perhaps the language of Rom. xvi. 17-19 should be applied 
to Gnostic teachers elsewhere than at Rome. It would be more 
appropriate to such teachers, it seems to us, than to the early 
Judaizers. It is a new indication to add to those which we are 
now pointing out, of the early appearance of Gnosticism in 
the apostolic Churches, 



THE LATER PAULINISM. 217 



hitherto vague and floating, presents itself to us here 
in a more decided and clearly marked shape. 

The false teachers whom Paul attacks in his 
epistle to the Colossians, are distinguished in fact by 
these two characteristics : a very rigorous asceticism, 
and a very daring boldness of speculation. They 
seem indeed to have endeavoured, in concert with the 
Judaizers, to impose circumcision upon the Gentile 
Christians (Col. ii. 11), but their originality does not 
lie in this. It consists in that voluntary asceticism 
which spares not the flesh, which credits itself with 
something specially meritorious just because it goes 
beyond the commandments of God, and which Paul 
so aptly characterizes in the word ideXoOprjo-icela 
(chap. ii. 22, 23). They not only observe the Sab- 
baths and the new moons, but they further command 
abstinence from certain kinds of food and drink : 
toncJi not ; taste not. With this system of abstinence 
is joined the worship of angels, among whom, no 
doubt, Jesus Christ was reckoned. 

This worship of angels implied something that 
went far beyond a mere popular superstition. It was 
a subject of speculation and transcendental science. 
These celestial beings were divided into classes and 
ranged in an elaborate hierarchy, which was intended 
to explain the relations of God and the world, the 
origin and nature of evil, the course of the world's 
history, and its final issue. 1 This system was destined 
to become transformed and perfected in the great 
Gnostic schools of the beginning of the second cen- 



1 It is well known that the worship of angels and a specula- 
tive philosophy of the celestial hierarchies formed an essential 
part of the Essenian theology. 



2iS THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



tury. But it is already sketched out here. The 
vocabulary of Gnosticism is created. Its terms still 
preserve, it is true, the religious colouring, the positive 
character due to their origin ; but they have already 
begun to merge both these in the metaphysical and 
abstract signification which constantly grows upon 
them. The aeons are enumerated : Opovoi, fcvpioTTjres, 
apyal, alcoves. Their totality is expressed by the 
Divine irX^pa^iia. Between the lowest of the aeons 
and the supreme God there is an ascending scale 
through which all these beings must rise, to re-enter 
by degrees the Divinity whence they issued. 

Such was the fantastic world that the teachers 
of Colossae were absorbed in contemplating. These 
are the far-fetched speculations, alike baseless and 
irrational, with which the apostle upbraids them in 
denouncing their religion of angels (a fxrj koopoucev 
e/xfiarevcov, chap. ii. 1 8). The more ingenious their 
theories, the prouder they were of them (elicrj fyvaiov- 
/jbevov). They claimed to have found the true wisdom, 
and to possess all its treasures (chap. ii. 3, 4) ; they 
had sounded the depths of being ; they knew, where 
others only believed. So they opposed their gnosis 
to the simple faith of humble Christians. Such is 
Judaistic Gnosticism, as it appears in the epistles to 
the Colossians and Ephesians. 

Its image becomes still more definite and complete 
in the three pastoral epistles (so called). There we 
have the same asceticism, the same fantastic specu- 
lations, the same dreams of the imagination (1 Tim. 
iv. 1-7). The fundamental dualism of this philosophy 
is still more marked (chap. iv. 3, 4). The system 
acquires a more articulate and consistent form ; it is 
a profane mythology {jxvOoi /3efi>]\oi kcu ypaooSeis) 



THE LATER PAUL1NISM. 219 



around whose figures metaphysics weaves stories 
of the strangest and most daring character. There 
are endless genealogies (yeveakoyiai dTrepavrot), pas- 
sionate and fruitless discussions, gratifying morbid 
curiosity. Finally, this philosophy already bears its 
historical title, — that of gnosis (1 Tim. vi. 20). l 

There can be no doubt of the nature of this 
primitive Gnosticism. It was evidently a speculation 
which arose in Jewish circles, and which remained 
Judaistic. Its teachers not only counselled circum- 
cision, the observance of the Sabbath, and the new 
moons (Col. ii. n-18) ; they claimed moreover to be 
the true teachers of the law (vofioSihda/caXoi, I Tim. 
i. 7). Doubtless they started with the Old Testa- 
ment, and by the mode of exegesis common at that 
time discovered in it all their dreams. The epistles 
call their fables fivdou 'IouSai/coL (Tit. i. 14) ; either 
because these myths were originated by Jews, or 
— what is more probable — because they consisted in 
Jewish legends or narratives from the Old Testament, 
transformed into philosophical myths in the spirit 
and direction of Philonism. 

But these new tendencies, which must from the 
beginning have assumed a variety of forms, were none 
the less fundamentally distinct from the Judaeo- 
Christianity of the primitive days. The latter re- 
sembled a continuation of Pharisaism in the Christian 
Church ; the former, as Ritschl and Mangold have 
well observed, has the appearance of a development 
of Essenism. We are unwilling to enter in this place 
upon the difficult question of the origin of Gnosticism. 



1 See Mangold, Die Irrlehrer der Pdstoralbriefe. Marburg, 
1856. 



220 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

It probably took its rise spontaneously, in different 
places at the same time. It was not in fact a special 
philosophy, but a general impulse of the human 
mind, which made itself felt at that period in all 
schools and creeds alike, striving to transform the 
elements of tradition, to dissolve and absorb them 
by a laborious process of speculative reason. Thus 
neo-Platonism and Neo-pythagoreanism are nothing 
else but a philosophical Gnosticism ; just as the specu- 
lations of Basilides or Valentinian are a Christian 
Gnosticism, and the Alexandrianism of Philo a Jewish 
Gnosticism. These systems are the result of the same 
spiritualizing processes, differently applied in different 
places and by different minds. They aim at the same 
goal, and pursue it by the same method, seeking not 
only discursive knowledge, but direct intuition, the 
possession and enjoyment of absolute truth. Finally, 
one permanent feature of all these schools is the union 
of speculative mysticism with practical asceticism. 

If we consider the abundant development of this 
Gnosticism at the beginning of the second century, 
and recollect that it was then the dominating 
philosophy throughout the East, we can scarcely 
doubt that its origin lay as far back as the middle of 
the first century. It cannot, in short, be supposed 
that the systems which prevailed about 120 or 130 
A.D., blossomed out all at once in the scholarly and 
finished form which then distinguished them. Gnos- 
ticism only arrived at this point of development by 
a somewhat lengthy process of elaboration. By this 
time it had its ancestors, its history, and traditions ; 
it loved to connect itself directly with the apostles. 1 



It is well known that Basilides, Valentinian, and Marcion 



THE LATER PAULIN1SM. 22 1 



Its chronology, no doubt, is still very uncertain. 
But the Gnostic terms scattered through Paul's later 
epistles, especially in the epistle to the Colossians, 
can no longer be brought forward as proofs against 
their authenticity. They only show that the origin 
of Gnosticism is much earlier than has long been 
supposed. Can we wonder to see such a tendency 
breaking out thus early, in the very midst of the 
Christian Church? In explanation of this fact it is 
not necessary to refer to the eclectic methods of the 
time, or to the general fermentation of thought in the 
great cities of Asia Minor, which was then engen- 
dering so many strange phenomena. It is enough 
to observe the remarkable affinity of Gnosticism with 
the Gospel. Gnosticism had the same end in view — 
the union of man with God, the redemption of fallen 
beings ; and in practical life its asceticism might only 
seem a rigorous application of Jewish or Christian 
morality. But we can also understand what dangers 
the apostolic teaching incurred from this association. 
In becoming a metaphysical speculation, the Gospel 
was losing its moral character. The concrete facts 
and positive tradition on which it was based, and 
which constituted its strength, were dissolving, evapo- 
rating, changing into symbols of abstract ideas. The 
Gospel was becoming a mythology. The Christian 
redemption, which always implies human liberty, and 
which involves struggles of conscience and conversion, 
was no longer anything more than the theory of the 

claimed to have collected secret traditions, which had been 
transmitted to them from the immediate disciples of the 
apostles. Thus Basilides was said to hold his doctrine from a 
certain Glaucias, an interpreter of Peter, and Valentinian from 
Theodas, a disciple of Paul, 



222 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

gradual return to God of every being who had issued 
from Him. Finally, the person of Christ was on the 
point of being merged and lost amongst a crowd of 
intermediate beings, in the hierarchy of aeons with 
whom His work and His glory were shared. 1 

Such was the new situation opening in Asia Minor, 
the dangers of which Paul was eager to avert. The 
apostle's penetrating mind, so swift to discern prin- 
ciples and to seize at the first glance both their 
nature and consequences, could not be mistaken as 
to the gravity of this movement. Still, as M. Reuss 
admirably remarks, "if the contact of Christianity with 
the leaven then working in men's minds had been 
purely hostile, it might perhaps have been possible to 
run the risk of leaving it alone to exhaust itself. But 
what made it specially dangerous was the incapacity 
of many minds to distinguish the radical difference 
between the two currents of ideas, and the pre- 
dilections of so many Greeks who were attracted to 
the Church chiefly by the desire of knowledge and by 
philosophical aspirations, and who naturally turned 
to the quarter from which these aspirations seemed to 
receive the most ample satisfaction. There came a 
time, therefore, when the old reactionary party of the 
Judaizers seemed less dangerous than the advanced 
party, — that of the new philosophers." 2 In this way 
all the essential features in the Paulinism of later times 
are sufficiently explained. 

I. Paulinism, hitherto of such a bold, I had almost 
said revolutionary character, was of necessity about 
to assume a more conservative form. Resistance 

1 See Reuss, Histoire de la thiologie apostolique, vol. i., pp. 
366-377. [Eng. trans., i., pp. 316-325.] 

2 See Reuss, vol. i., p. 378. [Eng. trans., i., p. 326.] 



THE LATER PAULINISM. 2V 



must succeed attack. The apostle seeks to recall 
men's minds to the old doctrine, the primitive tradi- 
tions (Eph. iii. 2-5 ; ii. 20 ; Phil. iii. 1 ; Col. ii. 2-5). 

2. The Pauline teaching, in face of this opposition, 
takes a more speculative form. In the first epistle to 
the Corinthians the apostle had already described his 
Gospel as perfect wisdom (aocbiav iv roU TeXe/ot?, 
1 Cor. ii. 6). But there he still preferred to contrast 
the foolishness of the cross with the wisdom of the 
world. Henceforward, without robbing the Gospel 
in any way of this Divine foolishness, or allowing the 
Christian to forget the sphere of the inner and sanc- 
tified life, he seeks to expound this perfect wisdom, 
and exhibits in his teaching the most exalted 
philosophy. Besides, his own instincts led him in 
this direction ; and he must have found a certain 
delight in opposing to these daring speculations the 
true Christian knowledge, and thus crowning the 
labour of his whole system (Col. i. 9, 10 ; ii. 2 ; Eph. 
iii. 10 : ol 6-qaavpol t?]<; aortas /cal rrjs yvMaeros iv 

XpiGTQ) CLTTOfCpVcflOL, Col. ii. 3). 

3. From this new point of view there inevitably 
issued a fresh result, — the concentration, or, I would 
say, the absorption, of the whole Christian system of 
dogma in Christology. The doctrines of justification 
by faith and universal salvation are summed up in 
the later epistles, with equal vigour, precision, and 
fulness. But that is not the main design of these 
letters. These great ideas no longer seem in peril. 
It was, as we have already said, the supreme royalty 
of Jesus Christ which was in danger of being eclipsed 
amid the crowd of intermediate beings. Accordingly, 
it is with triumphant pride that Paul overthrows and 
lays prostrate at the feet of the Son of God all these 



224 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



powers, thrones, and aeons, that dispute with Him 
the honour of the work of redemption. The declara- 
tion of the transcendental worth of the person and 
work of Jesus follows as a matter of course. 

4. Lastly, a final and no less important change 
was at the same time taking place in Paul's ethics. 
The letters to the Corinthians seemed to counsel 
some degree of asceticism, especially with regard to 
marriage. This asceticism, as we have said, was not 
deduced from the personal doctrine of the apostle ; 
but the expectation of Christ's immediate coming, 
and the fear of the great tribulations which were to 
precede it, had led him to urge, somewhat too 
strongly, the precept of abstinence. Though mar- 
riage is good, he had said, celibacy is still better 
(1 Cor. vii. 1, 7, 28-31, 38). Already, in the epistle to 
the Romans, whatever exclusiveness and narrowness 
might be found in these sayings had disappeared 
(Rom. xiv.). A wider view of the matter is revealed. 
Evidently the apostle's horizon had extended in the 
direction of the future ; the final catastrophe no 
longer seems imminent ; family and social life, with 
their duties, resume henceforth their value and impor- 
tance in his eyes. Indeed, it is above all in this 
sphere that the Christian life ought to unfold itself. 
Nowhere has the apostle insisted on social and 
domestic duties so much as in his later letters 
(Eph. v. 15-vi. 9; Col. iii. 17-iv. 6; Phil. iv. 8, 9). 
Asceticism is radically condemned, both in its prin- 
ciple and its precepts (1 Tim. iv. 1-5). On seeing 
it preached by such doubtful teachers, the apostle 
became more sensible of its danger. 

It is time to study more closely the character of 
each of these epistles. 



CHAPTER II. 

THE EPISTLES TO PHILEMON, TO THE COLOSSIANS, 
AND TO THE EPHESIANS. 

THESE three letters form a distinct group among 
the epistles of the Captivity, and must not be 
separated. Written at the same time, very probably 
from the prison at Caesarea, and carried to Asia Minor 
by the same messengers, they preserve striking traces 
of this close connexion in their origin (Philem. 10 
— comp. Col. iv. 9 ; Philem. 23, 24 — comp. Col. iv. 10, 
12, 14; Philem. 2 — comp. Col. iv. 17; Col. iv. 7 — 
comp. Eph. vi. 21). These epistles, in fact, mutually 
imply each other ; and it soon becomes evident that 
they had one and the same author. 

I. The Epistle to Philemon. 

If they are not Paul's, it must be acknowledged 
that there existed a writer possessed of sufficient skill 
and information to invent a complete and happily 
conceived historical situation, and to insert in the 
apostle's life without violation 'of history a most 
reasonable and charming romance. To admit such 
a fiction will, perhaps, scarcely seem easier than to 
accept the apostolic origin of these three letters. 

Onesimus, one of Paul's messengers, was a fugitive 
slave. He had been converted by the imprisoned 
apostle, had attached himself to his person, and 

*** 15 



226 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

lavished his services upon him. He belonged to a 
Christian master in the neighbourhood of Colossae, 
named Philemon, a personal friend of Paul. The 
apostle sends him back in charge of Tychicus, and 
restores him to his master, giving him a brief note 
written in his own hand, designed to secure his 
favourable reception by Philemon. 

The letter only contains a few friendly lines ; but 
they are so full of grace and wit, of earnest, trustful 
affection, that this short epistle shines among the rich 
treasures of the New Testament as a pearl of ex- 
quisite fineness. Never has there been a better fulfil- 
ment of the precept given by Paul himself at the close 
of his letter to the Colossians : 6 X070? v/icov irdvTore 
iv yjipiTi, ciXarc rjprv/Lcevos, elBevat 7rco? Bel vfias evl 
e/cdara) cnroKpiveadai (chap. iv. 6). Baur sacrifices it 
to the logic of his system somewhat unwillingly. 
" This letter," he says, " is distinguished by the private 
nature of its contents ; it has nothing of those common- 
places, those general doctrines void of originality, 
those repetitions of familiar things, which are so fre- 
quent in the supposed writings of the apostle. It 
deals with a concrete fact, a practical detail of ordinary 
life. . . . What objection can criticism make to 
these pleasant and charming lines, inspired by the 
purest Christian feeling, and against which suspicion 
has never been breathed ? " ] Alas ! all these graces 
render the victim more interesting, but they do not 
save it ! Beneath its innocent and candid appearance 
this epistle conceals what astonishing subtleties, what 
a treacherous aim ! Baur has discovered a mysterious 
design, an ambitious dogmatic purpose underlying it ; 

1 See Bauv's Patilus, vol, ii., p. 82 [Eng. trans., if., p. 80], 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 227 



and the poor epistle is ruthlessly condemned ! This 
impeachment of Baur's, however, reminds us a little 
of that of the wolf against the lamb. " If the Pauline 
origin of the other epistles of the Captivity, especially 
that of the Pastorals," says he, " gives rise to so many 
objections and is involved in so many difficulties, if 
therefore it is in the highest degree doubtful whether 
we have any letter belonging to this period of the 
apostle's life, how could this little friendly note, dealing 
with a matter of detail and private life, be allowed to 
make an exception ? " Obviously, this is the wolfs 
final argument : If it was not thou, it was thy brother ! 
The little note may be innocent in itself, but it 
has the fault and the misfortune to be too much 
akin to the other epistles, with their very suspicious 
character. 

The complaint, doubtless, admits of no reply. But 
we may ask whether this argument would not be 
of equal force if we attempted to reverse it ? Would 
it be less logical to say : The epistle to Philemon 
affords no ground for critical suspicion ; and since 
it is inseparably connected with the epistles to the 
Colossians and Ephesians, its existence constitutes 
a very strong argument in favour of the two latter ? 
In fact, this short letter to Philemon is so intensely 
original, so entirely innocent of dogmatic preoccu- 
pation, and Paul's mind has left its impress so clearly 
and indelibly upon it, that it can only be set aside by 
an act of sheer violence. Linked from the first with 
the two epistles to which we have just referred, it 
is virtually Paul's own signature appended as their 
guarantee, to accompany them through the centuries. 

It is needless to say that we have not succeeded 
in' perceiving the profound and ambitious design 



228 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

which Baur has detected in the letter to Philemon. 
We take it simply for what it is, — that is to say, a 
petition to a Christian friend on behalf of his slave. 
We delight to meet with it on our toilsome road, 
and to rest awhile with Paul from his great contro- 
versies and fatiguing labours in this refreshing oasis 
which Christian friendship offered to him. We are 
accustomed to conceive of the apostle as always 
armed for warfare, sheathed in logic and bristling 
with arguments. It is delightful to find him at his 
ease, and for a moment able to unbend, engaged in 
this friendly intercourse so full of freedom and even 
playfulness (vers, n, 19, 20). 

Paul has often been blamed for sending Onesimus 
back to his master. His conduct has been regarded 
as giving sanction to slavery. This accusation does 
not seem to me at all worthy of regard. The mighty 
force of the Gospel, which in regenerating the heart 
elevated all men, and created a new society without 
disturbing existing social institutions, is perhaps no- 
where better exhibited than in these few lines. Where, 
I ask, could we find, not merely a more radical con- 
demnation of the causes and results of slavery, but a 
more complete emancipation of the debased slave? 
Have we not here the practical realization of the 
beautiful Christian idea which merges all social dis- 
tinctions in Christ, and restores to each man in his 
neighbour his brother, his other self, uniting them as 
members of the same family for all eternity ? "I do 
not wish," writes the apostle to Philemon, " to decree 
anything authoritatively. It is the aged Paul who 
from his prison, and in the name of our mutual affec- 
tion, entreats thee on behalf of his son — that son whom 
1 have begotten in my chains — Onesimus, the once 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 229 

lost and useless slave, who now returns to thee, so 
dear and precious both to thee and me. . . . Thou 
didst lose him for a time ; thou regainest him for 
eternity. Receive him no longer as a slave, but as a 
brother in the flesh, and in the Lord. If thou holdest 
me for a friend, receive him as thou wouldst myself." 
This epistle is not merely a revelation of the apostle's 
heart, it becomes further, through its moral signifi- 
cance, an invaluable document of the Pauline ethics. 

II. COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS. 

The epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians 
demand more extended consideration. Their mutual 
relations and obviously close connexion present to 
criticism the most difficult of problems. De Wette 
first of all expressed grave doubts of the apostolic 
origin of the epistle to the Ephesians ; in the end, he 
absolutely rejected it. A strict comparison with the 
letter to the Colossians was decidedly unfavourable to 
it. It seemed to be nothing more than an oratorical 
and at times verbose amplification of the other ; and, 
though not deficient in merit, it was at least wanting 
in originality. 

But de Wette's investigations, although so accurate, 
were incomplete. The question wears another aspect, 
which has escaped his observation. Everything has 
not been said, when the dependence of the epistle 
to the Ephesians on that to the Colossians is once 
established. He should have asked whether this 
relation is not mutual, and whether the epistle to the 
Colossians, though apparently more original, is not in 
its turn inseparably connected with Ephesians. It is 
not surprising that the question, when approached 
from this side, has received an opposite solution. 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



Mayerhoff and Schncckenburger have maintained, 
not without some show of reason, that the epistle to 
the Ephesians was the original and primitive letter. 
The former, indeed, has not hesitated to bring the 
same accusation of plagiarism against Colossians that 
de Wette brought against Ephesians. 

It becomes apparent from these conflicting argu- 
ments that the dependence of the two letters is mutual, 
and that they cannot really be separated. On that 
point Baur was not mistaken. Starting with the 
assumption that Ephesians is not authentic — a fact 
which he considered demonstrated by de Wette, he 
had no difficulty in exhibiting clearly the inner soli- 
darity of the two epistles ; and he insisted with logical 
force that the fall of the one necessarily involves that 
of the other. In his view, the identity of their aim, 
method, and dogmatic contents, and of the desig- 
nation of their messenger, sufficiently attest their 
common authorship. It will perhaps be observed that 
in the end, and by this roundabout means, Baur's 
criticism almost annihilates those observations of de 
Wette which in the first instance were its support and 
starting-point. After reaching this conclusion, what 
are we to make of these exegetical and literary details 
which betray the imitator's hand ? If there is pla- 
giarism, it is in this case the author copying himself ! 
Baur only departs from the original tradition on one 
point: he refers to the year no or 120 the literary 
phenomenon which has usually been placed about 
60 A.D. ; and he assumes as very probable in one 
of Paul's disciples a procedure which he considers 
absolutely impossible in the case of Paul himself. 

In this way modern criticism brings us back to its 
own starting-point. We must, in fact, complete de 



THE ASIATIC E PIS TIES. 



Wette's examination, if we do not wish to be misled 
at the outset by appearances. We have not here 
the simple relation of a copy to its original. The 
question is more complex and delicate. The coin- 
cidences of the two epistles are not merely external. 
Their unity of inspiration is even more striking than 
their resemblance in style. In both there is the same 
theological standpoint, and the same errors are con- 
troverted. There is between them, if I may so speak, 
an intimate and mutual interpenetration. The same 
matter is digested twice over ; but the relation between 
the two treatises is such that, notwithstanding their 
constant resemblance, there is never on the one hand 
absolute originality, nor on the other servile imitation. 
And we have no more ground for regarding the epistle 
to the Ephesians as a secondary amplification of the 
epistle to the Colossians than for viewing the latter 
as a mere summary of the former. 

The double relationship of the two epistles being 
once thoroughly apprehended, there can no longer be 
any doubt of their common origin. Conceived at the 
same time, in the same spirit, and produced under the 
same circumstances, carried to neighbouring Churches 
by the same messenger Tychicus, they seem to us 
like twin sisters, that suffer from separation, each of 
them complete only when the other is beside her. 
They are in secret compact, and each makes allusion 
to her sister in ways more or less direct or obscure, 
but nevertheless conclusive. 

In the first place, it is evident that the epistle 
to the Ephesians corresponds with the epistle to 
the Colossians ; it recalls and implies it. It repro- 
duces its main ideas and characteristic phrases, and 
develops the same theme. At one point this tacit 



232 THE APOSTLE PAUL" 

relation is conspicuous, and is revealed in a manner so 
incidental that the connexion becomes obvious with- 
out there being any possibility of regarding it as the 
intentional and studied work of a forger. Ephesians 
vi. 21 contains a manifest allusion to Colossians iv. 7. 
The author did not write the former passage without 
thinking of the latter: f 'Iva elS^re teal vjuiefc ra kclt 
ifiL This conjunction real, contained in all the manu- 
scripts, would be inexplicable without the parallel 
passage in Colossians. Now can we imagine that 
an imitator, after having composed the epistle to the 
Ephesians, and conceiving the idea of connecting it 
with the epistle to the Colossians, would have con- 
fined himself in carrrying out his project to this 
simple conjunction ? Such a proceeding requires a 
skill and delicacy beyond belief. 

The epistle to the Colossians, in its turn, corre- 
sponds with that to the Ephesians ; it assumes it and 
refers us to it. To be convinced of this, we must first 
of all abandon the common notion that the latter is an 
epistle addressed specially to the Church at Ephesus. 
It is well known that the words ev 'E^ecra>, of the 
superscription, are wanting in the most ancient manu- 
scripts, and that Marcion read, on the contrary, eV 
Aaohuceia. What is still more decisive, is the fact 
that the so called letter to the Ephesians was ad- 
dressed to readers whom Paul had never seen, and 
who had never seen him (Eph. i. 15-19; iii. 1-4; 
iv. 17-22). Who then were these readers? It is plain 
that they must be sought for not far from Colossse, 
since the same messenger is charged with both letters. 

A passage in the letter to the Colossians, hitherto 
overlooked by critics, seems to me to indicate them 
clearly enough : 0i\co jap v^a^ elSevai rjXiKov dycava 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 233 

eyu> irepX v/jlojv koX twv iv AaoOiiceiq, ical oaoc ov% 
ecopafcav rb irpoacoTrov fiou iv crapicl (Col. ii. i). This 
passage proves that the author of Colossians had, 
when writing, several groups of readers in view — two 
at any rate — that of the Church of Colossae, and that 
of the Church of Laodicea and other Churches who 
were unacquainted with the apostle. Does not this 
latter expression admirably describe the readers of the 
epistle to the Ephesians ? Moreover, the author of 
the epistle to the Colossians wrote two letters — one to 
the Church of Colossae, and another which he describes 
as intended to be sent on to Colossae from Laodicea 
(Col. iv. 16). Can this be any other than the letter to 
the Ephesians? Whoever has duly appreciated the 
intimate connexion of the two epistles will not for a 
moment doubt that the author to the Colossians refers 
in this passage to the letter that we now possess, and 
which bears the address of Ephesus. 

Does it follow that Marcion was right in reading iv 
AaohiKeia for iv 'Eipearp ? Certainly not. Marcion 
only made a conjecture, on the strength of the gap in 
the manuscripts, and one which arose naturally from 
this very passage (Col. iv. 16). Marcion's testimony 
at least proves that no other letter to the Laodiceans 
was known to early Christian antiquity. But we 
hasten to add that Marcion, and after him all critics 
who adopted his suggestion, both misread and still 
more misinterpreted the passage in Colossians on 
which they relied. The text, in fact, does not indicate 
a special letter sent from Paul to the Laodiceans. 
The existing epistle cannot have been addressed to 
Laodicea in particular, any more than to Ephesus. 
If Paul had addressed his letter to the Christians of 
Laodicea, how could he have sent greeting to them 



234 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

and their pastor Nymphas through those of Colossae, 
instead of appending his salutations to the letter he 
was sending directly to themselves ? But, in point 
of fact, we do not read in Colossians iv. \6 rrjv eh 
AaoSt/ceiav, but ttjv ifc AdoSt/ceia? ; that is, the lettev 
which will reach yon from Laodicea, and not the letter 
which I have addressed to Laodicea. The epistle 
must have been addressed to a circle of Churches in 
the neighbourhood which had never seen Paul. 

We will not pursue the discussion further. The 
mutual affinity and solidarity of the two letters must 
be seen to be sufficiently established. Baur's demon- 
stration on this head is irrefragable. The two letters 
come to us from one and the same author, who while 
writing one had the other planned in his mind, and in 
composing the second did not forget the first. Every 
attempt to separate them is doomed to failure. They 
will always stand or fall together. In these later 
days criticism seems to have better understood the 
complexity of this literary problem, and has invented 
another hypothesis for its solution. An attempt has 
been made to discover in the epistle to the Colossians 
an authentic nucleus, by the help of which a later 
writer might first of all have drawn up the epistle 
to the Ephesians, returning afterwards to Paul's own 
letter and amplifying it freely, in order to make it 
more conformable with his own work, hoping thus to 
conceal his device. History, and still more a candid 
exegesis, condemn this strange solution, which finds 
its impracticability so little of an embarrassment. 

III. Progress of Paul's Doctrine. 
The apostle, in these two epistles, does not resume 
the dialectical exposition of his doctrine of justifica- 



THE ASIATIC E PIS TIES. 235 



tion by faith. But it is easy to discover and trace 
in them the anthropological and soteriological basis 
of Paulinism (Eph. ii. 8-10; Col. ii. 12-14; Phil. iii. 
3-10; Eph. i. 13, 14; Col. iii. 1-3). The union and 
perfect equality of Jews and Gentiles in Christ, so 
keenly contested in the preceding period, are here set 
forth as accomplished facts ; this victory is won (Col. 
iii. 11). The lofty standpoint reached by the apostle 
in the epistle to the Romans is firmly maintained 
and powerfully vindicated (Eph. ii. 11-19; Col. i. 
20-23). But all these preceding conquests are only 
the basis and starting point of a new development. 

It is here, in fact, that the epistle to the Ephesians 
takes up the doctrinal work of the apostle, to continue 
it in a new sphere. We now pass the boundaries 
of history and time, and plunge into the realm of 
metaphysics ; for it is really an essay in Christian 
metaphysics that Paul is about to make. The Person 
of Christ will of course be the corner-stone of this 
edifice. 1 Passing by the earlier conditions and his- 
torical stages through which the Divine plan has been 
accomplished, Paul apprehends the redemption as 
an eternal thought of God. This Divine conception 
becomes the generative principle of all future evolu- 
tion. It is the cause and end of the entire creation ; 
it explains everything, because it produced every- 
thing. The Gospel, hitherto conceived of merely as 
a means of salvation, is thus raised through the 
apostle's persistent study to the height of a universal 



1 The thought of the author of the Fourth Gospel pursued 
a kindred development. The Pauline theosophy and the 
Johannine mysticism, whilst diverse in origin, are united in 
their end. 



236 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

principle. We must, however, hasten to add that 
while thus opening new vistas to Christian doctrine, 
by making the Gospel the subject of lofty contem- 
plation, Paul is careful not to change the living 
realities of faith into barren abstractions or transform 
the moral drama of the redemption into a law of 
necessary development. His doctrine is enlarged and 
elevated, without losing any of its moral fulness and 
quality. But it had to create new forms for its new 
matter; and some of his expressions, such as irXijpcofia 
and alcoves, while retaining their historical meaning 
(Eph. i. 10 ; ii. 7), acquire a metaphysical significance 
which they did not possess in the previous epistles. 

Does this imply, as Baur supposed, that the writer 
has borrowed from the Gnostic systems of the 
early part of the second century? It seems to us 
that the change in Paul's vocabulary has a simpler 
explanation, that it is in fact a necessary consequence 
of the advance of his doctrine. If there has been any 
borrowing, it is rather on the side of Basilides and 
Valentinian, who most certainly formed their dialect 
on the religious phraseology of the New Testament. 1 
Indeed, it is easy to see that in our epistles this 
terminology as yet is vague, and wavers between 
the popular and Gnostic meaning, and that no strict 
and settled order in the hierarchy of celestial beings 
is here imagined. In the second century, on the 
contrary, all this was arranged and determined with 
mathematical accuracy. It will always be difficult to 
believe that a Gnosticism of quite undeveloped form 
is posterior to that which had attained its full per- 
fection. Certainly, Paul follows the daring speculation 

: See Tertullian, De prccscriptione liaretkorwn^ chap, xxxvii. 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 237 



of the new teachers into the transcendental regions of 
the invisible world. He also sees fit to make, on his 
own account, a cursory enumeration of the spiritual 
powers (Eph. i. 21 ; Col. i. 16) ; for he has the spirit 
of the age, and reasons in the same manner. But he 
shows no interest, no curiosity about the subject. 
His sole purpose is to make Jesus Christ sovereign in 
heaven, as well as upon and beneath the earth (Eph. 
i. 10, 21, 22 ; Col. ii. 15). 

It is in the epistle to the Ephesians that the 
apostle unfolds and sets forth the eternal plan of 
redemption, as it embraces not only the course of the 
ages, but the whole universe. This conception, which 
forms the basis of the epistle, gives it its original and 
distinctive character. Having in his letter to the 
Colossians disposed of the controversial question and 
of all incidental and personal matters, the apostle is 
here absorbed in this great idea, which he delights to 
set forth in all its fulness. 

The basis of redemption is the grace of God (chap. 
ii. 6, 7). This unconditional grace, the absolute and 
eternal act of the Divine will, is the source of the pre- 
destination already indicated in Romans viii. 29 ; and 
it is developed with great affluence of expression 
in the first chapter of Ephesians : " Blessed be God 
our Father, who elected us before the creation of the 
world to be holy and without spot before Him ; 
having beforehand decreed our adoption in Jesus 
Christ, in whom we have the pardon of our sins 
according to the riches of His grace. Thus He has 
made known to us the mystery of His will, which 
according to His good pleasure he had purposed in 
Himself." This plan of redemption remained un- 
comprehended and unrevealed until the time of its 



238 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

full realization. Paul calls it a mystery (chap. i. 9 ; 
comp. 1 Cor. ii. 7). As this mystery was revealed in 
Christ, and Christ is its essential content, it is also 
the mystery of Christ, or the mystery of the Gospel 
(chaps, iii. 4; vi. 19 ; comp. Rom. xvi. 25). That which 
had not become matter of history existed in this 
way beforehand in the mind of God. Salvation was 
actual, though not manifested. In this sense it is 
also regarded as a heritage reserved for the faithful, 
of which the Holy Spirit shed abroad in our hearts 
is already the certain guarantee (chap. i. 13, 14, 18; 
comp. Rom. viii. 16 and 2 Cor. i. 22). 

This plan of salvation, the eternal conception of 
God, is a Divine economy of the times and the zvorlds 
(chap. i. 10). This economy, this plan of the ages 
(irpoOea^ tcov alcovayv), is a work of wisdom. Through 
it is revealed and made known in its wealth of variety 
the Divine wisdom, so fertile in its resources and rich 
in its means (Jj iroXviroiKikos ao(f)[a rod Oeov, chap. iii. 
10). Thus, in the general economy, is ordained the 
succession of special economies, which simply mark 
stages in the progress of the work of universal re- 
demption. This salvation, conceived in eternity and 
prepared in preceding ages, is revealed in its own 
time, which is the very fulness of the times (Gal. iv. 
4 ; Eph. i. 10). But any one who has thoroughly 
apprehended the nature of the Pauline doctrine must 
know that it is pre-eminently realistic and matter of 
fact. It never represents the revelation of God as the 
exhibition of an abstract idea, but as the unfolding of 
a Divine operation. The consummation of revelation 
is therefore, at the same time, the consummation of 
God's creative work ; and the pleroma of things corre- 
sponds of necessity with the pleroma of times. The 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 239 



word 7r\r)po)fia thus passes naturally from its original 
to its metaphysical signification. 

The starting point of this idea — a leading charac- 
teristic of these epistles — is in 1 Corinthians xv. 28. 
According to this passage, the supreme design of God, 
carried out in the whole creation throughout the entire 
succession of ages, is to permeate and f 11 all tilings, to 
become all in all. The apostle's doctrine, developing 
in this direction, conceived of the Divine action as 
pouring all its riches into the Person of Christ, who 
thus actually becomes the pleroma of Divinity. Christ 
in His turn constantly pours out and communicates all 
His riches upon and to His Church, which becomes 
the pleroma of Christ, the complete realization of His 
virtue, His actual body, precisely as Christ was the 
corporeal manifestation (a-cofjiaTifccos) of the Divine 
plenitude. Thus God fills Christ ; Christ fills the 
Church ; and the Church, extending to the limits of 
all things, fills the universe (chaps, iii. 19 ; i. 23). 

The crisis of this Divine action is the appearance 
of Jesus upon earth ; and in that appearance, His 
death upon the cross. The centre of gravity of 
Christ's work has not been removed. The historical 
cause of redemption is still the Saviour's expiatory 
death (chaps, i. 7; ii. 13, 16 ; Col. ii. 14, 15). The cir- 
cumference is enlarged ; the centre remains the same. 
It is from this standpoint that Paul contemplates the 
progressive realization of the plan of God, advancing 
towards its final goal, the reconciliation of all opposi- 
tions, and the consummation in Christ of the unity 
of the world. Thus has the barrier been overthrown 
already between Jews and Gentiles (to fieaoroi^ov tov 
(f)pay/jiov), now brought near and united in one and 
the same body by the virtue of the cross (cwo-wyua, 



240 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

chap. ii. 13-16). This work of reconciliation is to 
extend, not only to the utmost limits of the human 
race, but to the whole universe : " For it has pleased 
God to reconcile all things in Him, having made 
peace by the blood of His cross, whether on earth or 
in heaven " (Col. i. 19, 20). 

This infinite extension of Christ's work implies of 
necessity a parallel exaltation of His Person. Since 
it is in and through Him that God realizes His 
eternal thought, Christ becomes by that very fact the 
actual medium of the Divine revelation and working. 
His Person now assumes in the transcendental region 
of metaphysics the supreme and kingly place that it 
already possesses in the Christian consciousness. To 
it must be referred the work of creation, as well as 
that of redemption. In it is attained the final unity 
of all things. The centre of the Gospel becomes the 
centre of the universe. The moral principle of the 
Christian life is also the metaphysical principle of the 
creation. 

IV. The Christology of Colossians. 

This transcendental Christology, implied through- 
out the epistle to the Ephesians, constitutes the 
special object of the letter to the Colossians. The 
apostle remains at the same standpoint, and the 
same horizon stretches before him ; but instead of 
considering, as before, the work of redemption as a 
whole, his attention is concentrated on the Person of 
Christ, in which moreover this work is summed up. 
The conception that he gives us of this Person rises 
almost to the height of the Johannine Christology. 
The name \6yo$ alone is wanting. But the actual 
name, which possibly Paul intentionally avoided, 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 241 

would scarcely modify in any way his conception 
(Col. i. 17 ; comp. John i. 3, 4). 

In his previous epistles the apostle had not 
formulated any precise Christological doctrine. It 
would be indeed a vain attempt to try to discover in 
them all the ideas of the epistle to the Colossians. 
But, on the other hand, there is nothing in the earlier 
epistles to exclude by anticipation the development 
here assumed by the Pauline Christology. We may 
gather from them some indications which prepare us 
for it. The notion of the ideal, or celestial man 
(1 Cor. xv. 47 ; Rom. v. 15) does not exhaust the 
apostle's conception. The unique and sovereign place 
which he accorded Christ in his inner consciousness, 
the absolute dependence which he felt with regard to 
Him, the worship he rendered Him, in which he never 
separates Him from God, must inevitably have led him 
on, sooner or later, to loftier conclusions. Let us read 
over again 2 Corinthians xiii. 14 ; 1 Corinthians xii. 
5-1 1. True, the doctrine of the Trinity is not formu- 
lated in these two passages ; but whoever will compare 
them, and observe how Paul, in expressing the very 
foundation of his Christian convictions, spontaneously 
attributes to the Spirit, to the Lord, and to God an 
absolutely equal share in the work of redemption, 
will easily satisfy himself that there exists here the 
germ of an idea which will carry the writer much 
further. Xor are these isolated and singular texts. 
We will not dwell on Romans ix. 5, the interpretation 
of which is so much disputed. But let us consider 
2 Corinthians iii. 17. Paul does not say, 6 Kvpio? 
TTvedfjLcL iaTLV ; but he says absolutely, 6 Kvpio$ to 
TTvev/id icrrcv. Is there not something here which goes 
beyond the idea of the " celestial man " ? Once more, 

16 






242 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

let us look at I Corinthians viii. 6 : el$ 0eo? e£ ov 
ra irdvTCL . . . et<? fcvpios 'Itjctov*; XpHTTOS, oY ov 1 
ra iravra teal 77/xeZ? oY avrov. Baur limits this ex- 
pression, oY ov ra iravra to the work of redemption. 
But is not this an arbitrary restriction ? Are not 
the two propositions exactly parallel, and equally 
absolute ? The context of the passage has a general 
bearing ; it puts the contrast between the monotheistic 
and the polytheistic idea, stated in most general 
terms. God is said to be the absolute source of all 
things, and Christ His one Agent. Baur's expla- 
nation recalls those of the Socinians, who succeeded 
also in disposing of John's prologue and of the state- 
ments of the epistle to the Colossians, by restricting 
them to the Gospel economy. This passage, besides, 
should be compared with the one preceding it. 
Seeing that Christ is the Spirit, in an absolute sense, 
is it incredible that Paul should have seen in this 
Spirit the principal of the creation as well as of 
redemption ? No doubt, there is not here all that we 
shall find in the epistle to the Colossians. But we 
have the germ out of which the Christology of later 
letters was developed. On this, as on all other points, 
we may assert that there was progress in the Pauline 
doctrine, — but progress with continuity. 

To sum up the Christology of the epistle to the 
Colossians : Christ is the image of the invisible God ; 
that is to say, the visible manifestation of God's 
invisible essence (chap. i. 15). He is, from the meta- 
physical point of view, the essential Mediator between 



1 The Codex Vaticanus has hi ov instead of 8l ov. But there 
are no reasons, other than dogmatic, for preferring this reading 
to that of all the other manuscripts. 



THE ASTATIC EPISTLES. 



God and the world. It is through Him that God 
imparts Himself to the world, and that the world 
returns to God. No doubt the expression irpcororoxo^ 
Traar]*; KTiaeo)^ puts Christ in absolute subordination, 
and associates Him with creation, placing Him indeed 
at its head, but also in the rank of creatures. 1 On 
the other hand, in face of the creation, He is raised to 
the same level with God ; for God has been pleased to 
pour into Him the plenitude of His divinity (Col. ii. 
9). " In Him all things were created, in the heavens 
and on the earth, the visible and the invisible. He is 
before all things, and all things have the basis of their 
existence in Him " (ra ttuvtcl iv avrw ovve<TTr]icev). 
He is the Divine irXijpw/jLa ; i.e., in Him is the pleni- 
tude, the totality of existence to be realized in the 
world (chap. i. 19). He is more particularly the Head 
of the Church, the First-born of the resurrection as 
of the creation, everywhere having the pre-eminence 
(eV iraaiv clvtos irpwrevcov, chap. i. 18). 

To comprehend these statements fully, we must 
admit the controversial aim which already begins to 
appear. The apostle seeks to give Christ supremacy 
in all things, so that His dignity shall not be dimi- 
nished nor His glory eclipsed in the hierarchy of aeons 
set up between God and the world. Christ is not a 
single aeon, one of a crowd — not a part of things — but 
the 7r\rjpa)/jLa. From Him the whole series of celestial 
and terrestrial beings derive their life ; to Him they 
must ever return, if they would not be separated 
from God. Paul knows but one Mediator in earth 



P On this phrase see Lightfoot, or Meyer ad loc. "First- 
born in respect of all creation'''' sets Christ in express contrast 
to the creatures. Comp. Heb. iii. 6 : " Christ as a Son over His 
(God's) house."] 



244 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

and heaven. The work of mediation and universal 
reconciliation is not a collective work ; the apostle 
does not suffer it to be shared. Redemption is the 
work of the Crucified. In Him alone God reconciles 
all things. It is by the blood of His cross that peace 
has been made in the visible and invisible universe 
(elprjvoTroirjaas hid rov aifiaTO^ rod aravpov avrov). 

From this point of view is obviously and naturally 
explained the passage in Colossians ii. 15, which has 
been so tortured by commentators : tnretchvGdfjLevos ra? 
dpyfis kclI ra? efoi/cr/a?, iSecyfjudTcaev iv irappTqala, 
GpiafjiftevGcis avrovs Iv avrcp ? What are these «/o%al 
and e^ovaiao} The majority of commentators, in- 
cluding de Wette and Meyer, regard them as demons, 
powers of sin and hell, and refer for proof to Eph. vi. 
12. But the two passages are neither similar nor 
parallel. We might ask, moreover, what the triumph 
of God and Christ over the diabolical powers has 
to do with this passage of Colossians ? Considering 
that the apostle has spoken already in Col. i. 16 of 
the apx^ 1 and e^ovalai, and still continues within the 
same circle of ideas, there is absolutely no authority 
for seeing in the second passage any powers other 
than those mentioned in the first. Now in Colossians 
i. 16, there is no question at all of infernal powers, 
but of those intermediate beings that theory had 
multiplied between the world and God, and amongst 
whom speculation distributed the work and the 
honour of universal redemption. Of this honour 
Christ has deprived them ; of this undeserved glory 
He despoiled them by His death on the cross. God 
has made Him Lord of all these powers, which now 
only serve in their vanquishment to adorn His trium- 
phal chariot. This passage, which was useless in 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 245 

its traditional interpretation, and counted for nothing 
in the apostle's argument, is thus seen to be a de- 
cisive blow directed against the radical principle of 
the Gnostic speculation. 

Paul does no more than rapidly traverse these lofty 
regions of the transcendental world ; he confines him- 
self to dispelling the clouds which might veil from 
our eyes the greatness of the Person and the work 
of Jesus. Only this purpose detains him there. He 
speaks of this invisible world with admirable sobriety ; 
and hastens to descend into the sphere of practical 
life, of which he has never lost sight. But he returns 
bringing to it new wealth of thought. Upon the 
heights he has reached, he apprehends the relation 
of Christ to the Church from a new point of view. 

Already, in Romans xii. 5 and 1 Corinthians xii. 
12-27, the Church had been regarded as an organic 
and substantial reality, a body whose members are 
individuals, and which manifests in its permanent 
unity the wealth lying hidden in its principle of life. 
It has been already designated the body of Christ 
(v/jLels Si eVre aoifia XpicrTOv, I Cor. xii. 27), — that is 
to say, a body having the root of its existence and its 
principle of unity in the Person of the Saviour. This 
appellation, the body of Christ, is something more than 
a metaphor. The Church is not conceived of apart 
from Christ, nor Christ apart from the body of the 
Church; but Christ continues present in the Church 
as its immanent principle of life. Finally, the apostle 
treated the Church as the virgin affianced to Christ 
(2 Cor. xi. 2) ; he suggested the same relation in 1 
Corinthians xi. 3, where Christ is called head (/cetfiaXrj) 
of the man, as the man is head of the woman. 

The speculative reflections to which the apostle 



246 THE APOSTLE PAUL, 

rises in the epistles of the Captivity give these 
ideas a new significance. The title of aco/xa acquires 
a transcendental import which it did not formerly 
possess ; Paul no longer says aco/xa XpLcrrov, but, 
in an absolute sense, to acofxa rod XpicrTov. In the 
former idiom XpLcrrov is an objective genitive ; in the 
latter it becomes a subjective genitive. In the first in- 
stance, the Church depends on Christ for its existence; 
in the second, Christ Himself has need of the Church 
to manifest all the plenitude of the life within Him. 
Not that Paul has adopted a new mode of thought; 
but evidently he has changed his point of view. 
Formerly, he ascended from the Church to Christ ; 
now, starting with the idea of the transcendental 
Christ, he contemplates the progressive manifestation 
and realization in the Church of the possibilities latent 
in Him. The Person of Christ is already the Church 
potentially (in pote?itia) ; and the Church is Christ 
Himself manifested (in actn). 

It would be easy by abuse of logic to push this 
spiritual unity of Christ and the Church to the point 
of metaphysical identification. Paul himself, let us 
say at once, did not go to this length ; his doctrine is 
entirely distinct from all pantheistic speculations on 
the subject. He holds, indeed, that the Church exists 
only in Christ ; but he does not assert that Christ 
exists only in the Church. The Person of Christ 
is rooted in God Himself. We have not to deal 
here with a series of abstractions equivalent to each 
other ; but with a processus of life, an organism con- 
sisting of living beings, who are distinct without being 
separated, and organically united without losing 
their identity. 



The term aco/xa obviously gains its full meanin 



THE ASIATIC E PIS TIES. 247 



only by combination with TrXrjpwfJba, which at the 
bottom expresses the same idea under another form 
(tjtls earl to aoifia avrov, to 7r\7]pcop,a tov Ta iravTa 
kv irao-i 7r\i]pov/jL6vov, Eph. i. 23). This passage is 
the summary of all the ideas developed in the two 
epistles. From the standpoint we have reached, it 
is its own interpretation. Just as Christ is the pleni- 
tude, the actual manifestation — we might almost say 
the aco/aa — of God (o-oo/ulcitikcos fca,ToiK€i irav to ttXtj- 
pco/u,a T7)<; 0eoT7]To<;), so the Church is the pleroma of 
Christ, the body in which all the plenitude of the life 
within Him is realized. But as, after all, Christ 
communicates nothing which does not come from 
God, the Church, from the ideal point of view, may be 
justly called the actualized pleroma of God, who fills 
all in all. Thus the Church and Christ are related to 
each other as soul and body. The soul animates the 
body; and the body makes manifest the virtues of 
the soul. Thus it was that Paul could assert that 
the sufferings of the Christian are the filling up of 
the sufferings of Christ Himself (Col. i. 24) ; for the 
Church is simply the prolonging of Christ's life, pre- 
sent and immanent in her, as the vivifying principle 
from which comes her growth and strength. This 
new conception is admirably expressed in several 
passages, the fulness and vigour of which cannot be 
rendered in any translation (Col. ii. 19; Eph. iv. 15, 
16 ; ii. 21). 

Finally, the relations of Christ and the Church find 
perfect expression in the image of the intimate union 
established between the man and woman by mar- 
riage (Eph. v. 22-25). This analogy furnishes the 
apostle in return with an admirable conception of 
marriage, far superior to that which he had given 



24S THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



in i Corinthians. The man and the woman form 
an indissoluble organic unity. Neither of the two 
attains full existence without the other. While the 
man is the head of the woman (K€<j>a\rj rfjs yvvaifcos), 
the woman on her part is called the body of the 
man (aco/iara rcov avSpwv, chap. v. 28), in the same 
sense as the Church is the body of Christ. Thus 
each belongs to and finds itself in the other ; and 
the bond of this living unity is love (chap. v. 28). 

We can now admire the energy and force of logic 
with which Paul has guarded his Christian theory 
from the approaches of the Gnostic dualism that 
threatened to corrupt Christianity, alike in its dog- 
matic principle and its ethical practice, and the un- 
faltering consistency with which he has carried out 
his belief. From the Pauline theory there is deduced 
a morality which is indeed the very reverse of the 
Gnostic ethics. The profound connexion which exists 
between the hortatory and dogmatic portions of the 
two epistles has not always been fully apprehended. 
The apostle dwells solely on the natural and ordinary 
duties of man : those of marriage, of the education 
of children, of the master towards his slave, of the 
slave towards his master, and, in short, on social and 
domestic duties in general. On the other hand, he 
vigorously attacks the dualistic morality of the false 
teachers of Colossae, which bordered on a barren asce- 
ticism. Nothing was more important from the first 
than to warn the Church against this fatal tendency, 
and to prevent it from falling into this well-worn 
groove. It is within the circle of life's ordinary "duties 
that all the sanctifying freedom of the evangelical 
principle should be exhibited. Christian morality 
does not create or impose any other duties than those 



THE ASIATIC EPISTLES. 249 



arising from the natural relations of men to each other; 
what it aims at and labours for, is to transform these 
relations, to purify and restore them to their ideal. 

Natural duty fulfilled by the aid of Christ — that is 
the essence of religious duty. The Church is not to 
be a private society; it is human society regenerated 
by the spirit of the Saviour, a new humanity. Paul 
preaches above all things purity of heart, of conduct, 
and of speech. He sanctifies marriage by presenting 
for its type the union of Christ and the Church, and 
education by placing it under the oversight of God. 
He brings down the master to the level of the slave 
by charity ; he raises the slave to the level of the 
master in appealing to his conscience. In a word, he 
opens to Christian humanity every path of progress. 
" For the rest, my brethren," he writes to the Philip- 
pians shortly after these two letters, " let everything 
that is true, that is pure, that is just, that is sound, 
lovable, and of good report, be the subject of your 
thoughts. Make every kind of virtue and of praise 
your aim " (Phil. iv. 8). 



CHAPTER III. 

THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 

PAUL'S dogmatics are finally resolved and ab- 
sorbed into a lofty Christology. This Christo- 
logy in its turn attains its last and crowning expression 
in the famous passage, Philippians ii. 6-1 1, which may 
be regarded as the keystone of the apostle's theo- 
logical edifice. But before discussing this text, it is 
absolutely necessary to make some reference to the 
epistle in which it is found. 

This last letter, written from the Praetorium at Rome, 
closes the historical life of Paul as related in the Acts. 
If the apostle had expected by appealing to Caesar to 
shorten the long imprisonment antecedent to his trial, 
his hope had been bitterly deceived. There was 
scarcely any more notice taken of him at Rome than 
at Caesarea. He had patiently to resume the work 
of his apostleship, and to carry it on in chains. His 
earnest words won many souls among the military 
population of the Praetorium, and even among the 
members of Nero's household. But at the same time 
his courage and example, by giving a fresh impulse 
to all missionary work, occasioned a sharper division, 
and a more violent contention in the Church between 
the friends of his gospel and the Judaizing party. 
The old Jewish spirit, conquered in Greece, seemed 
to find in the genius and customs of the Roman race 



THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 251 



a more favourable soil, where it was to take deep root 
and speedily flourish anew. 

Paul, therefore, had to pass through heavy trials 
and endure painful conflicts. Many Christians who 
should -have comforted him disowned and rejected 
him. He suffered from prolonged isolation, and pos- 
sibly from the denunciations of his brethren. When, 
however, he wrote his epistle to the Philippians, there 
seemed a break in the sky that had so long been 
overcast. Timothy was with him. Epaphroditus 
had come to bring him the precious token of the faith- 
ful affection of his spiritual children in Macedonia. 
He foresees at length a speedy issue to his trial, and 
awaits it, not without emotion, but in perfect resig- 
nation. Even his apprehensions cannot disturb or 
restrain the joy which overflows his heart. This long 
and wearisome imprisonment — a thing so fatal to 
feeble souls — had as little power to vanquish the old 
hero as the storms and struggles of his public life. 
He shows himself at this critical moment as indomi- 
table and fervent as ever. Hear him cry, in those 
triumphant tones which he can always command in 
speaking of the cause of Christ : " And now, happen 
what may, Christ shall always be glorified in my 
flesh, whether by my life, or my death ! " (chap. i. 20.) 

In this short letter we must not look for any dog- 
matic controversy or design. Though the apostle 
occasionally refers to the Judaizing agitation, whether 
at Rome or at Philippi (chaps, i. 17 ; iii. 2, 18), it is 
only in passing, and by way of a pastoral warning. 
In like manner, the Christological passage (chap. ii. 
6-1 1) forms an integral part of an entirely practical 
exhortation to self-renunciation and devotion. Nei- 
ther of these points therefore can be regarded as 



252 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

indicating the aim of the epistle, or as constituting 
its direct object. We must abandon the attempt to 
discover a purpose in the letter, or else simply accept 
that which the author himself reveals. Paul wishes 
to thank the Philippians for their generous bounty, to 
give tidings of himself and hope of his speedy return 
(chap. ii. 24). This is just an intimate and familiar 
letter, in which he pours out with delight the 
fulness of his heart. He speaks to them of them- 
selves, and of himself; and these two subjects, after 
alternating throughout the epistle, are in the end 
blended and lost in each other (comp. chaps, i. 1-12 
and i. 12-26 ; i. 27 and ii. 17-30; chaps, iii. and iv.). 
That is the whole plan and order of the epistle. 
This explains the abrupt transitions and unexpected 
changes of tone, which have led some critics to sup- 
pose that we have here two, or even three, of Paul's 
letters combined in one. 

They forget that Paul was a man, and an apostle, 
before he was a theologian ; and are actually surprised 
at his not giving to this familiar letter the methodical 
order of a treatise. But we have only to read these 
few pages consecutively to apprehend, in the absence 
of the logical unity for which we have no right to 
look, their profound unity of inspiration and moral 
tendency. The logic of feeling differs from that of 
thought ; it is perceived by the heart. Here the 
sentiments prompt and answer to each other, in the 
most natural and harmonious manner. These pages 
were written from a single inspiration. We may add, 
that they do not so much exhibit the apostle's theolo- 
gical creed, as the feelings of his heart and the matu- 
rity of his religious life. There is here a wealth of 
Christian experience, a fulness of faith, a strength and 



THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPTANS. 253 

delicacy of affection, which remind us of the finest 
chapters in the second letter to the Corinthians. 
There is the same overflowing inner life ; only, pro- 
longed trial and meditation have deepened, calmed, 
and matured it. The apostle does sometimes speak 
with his former severity (chap. iii. 2), but there is more 
gentleness and resignation (chap. iv. 18). Equally 
prepared either to live or die, his spirit is altogether 
less passionate and more tender, less susceptible and 
more detached from earth. It excites us less ; but it 
touches us more. A subtle note of melancholy per- 
vades it. Paul is already crowned with the martyr's 
halo, and with the reflection of immortality. 

Its practical character notwithstanding, the epistle 
none the less raises us to those lofty and luminous sum- 
mits of Christian spirituality to which the apostle's 
doctrine finally attained, and whereon it rested. This 
spirituality is especially remarkable in its eschato- 
logical doctrine. Paul still expects, as he always 
had done, the great day of the Lord (f} flip a Xpcarov, 
chap. i. 10). The resurrection of the dead still seems 
to him the final goal of the development of the new 
humanity upon the earth (chap. iii. 1 1). The return of 
Jesus, coming to change this body of humiliation into 
the likeness of His glorified body, continues to be the 
object of his hope. But there is no longer any 
feverishness, or impatience, or distress in this glorious 
expectation. It is with an absolutely disinterested 
and submissive faith that Paul contemplates and 
traces out in history the slow yet constant unfold- 
ing of the Father's will. He entirely relinquishes 
the attempt to question a future whose secret is with 
God. Through this very renunciation he rises to the 
serene heights of the ideal of Jesus, the thought of 



254 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

the inner and progressive transformation of all 
humanity under the continuous organic action of the 
Gospel leaven. Let no one say that this spiritualized 
expectation of the consummation of the Kingdom is 
a remainder of Jewish superstition. It is of the very 
essence of the Christian faith ; it belonged to the 
faith of Jesus ; it will continue to be that of the 
Church. The Gospel, in truth, not only aims at the 
individual salvation of the soul after death; it has also, 
above all things, a social and universal import, and 
in the aim of its Founder had this from the first. It 
entered into the history of humanity as the decisive 
factor in its destinies. If human history is a drama, 
it is Christ who controls it and brings about its 
denouement. The Day of Christ will be its consum- 
mation, which will consist in the final glorification of 
His Person and His work. Such is the inevitable 
conclusion of the Christian philosophy of history. If 
this conception of the destiny of the human race is 
mistaken, if the Gospel of Christ does not contain 
the last word of all our debates, it is plain that there 
is no salvation in Him. If Jesus ceases to be the 
Saviour of the world, He also ceases to be the 
Saviour of the individual. 

It was its social aim that constituted the strength 
and greatness of Jewish Messianism. There was in 
this an element of profound truth, which Paul, following 
Jesus, extracted from it and preserved. The philo- 
sophy of history derived from this source, and which 
the apostle has gradually sketched out on the largest 
scale, is the chief glory of his doctrine. He has 
shaken off everything that was narrow, national, 
materialistic, or vulgarly supernatural in the Jewish 
conception. He sets aside its ingenious calculations, 



THE EPISTLE TO THE PH1L1PP1ANS. 255 

its "signs of the times," and fantastic visions. He 
courageously addresses himself to the practical tasks 
of everyday life, pointing out the way of progress, 
and walking in it himself without either discourage- 
ment or impatience, forgetting what has been already 
done that he may think only of what remains to be 
accomplished (ei> Be, to, fjuev oiriaa) eVtXav^avo/xevo?, 
rots 8e e/xTrpoaOev 67reKT€Lv6/n€vos, chap. iii. 14). 

But while the short-lived hopes of the popular 
Messianism have faded, others nobler and dearer have 
dawned on the Christian consciousness. 

Paul felt himself too thoroughly united to Christ 
ever to admit the thought of separation from Him. 
" In life, and in death," he had written in the epistle 
to the Romans, " we are the Lord's " (idv re ^co/iev 
idv re diroOv^aKCDixev, rod Kvplov ea/xev) ; and else- 
where : " I am persuaded that neither death nor life, 
nor anything else can separate us from the love of 
God in Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. xiv. 8 ; viii. 38). 
For a long time Paul had now lived in the presence 
of death ; and in death itself he had learned to find 
his Saviour, and his life. Death had been sivalloived 
tip by life. This spiritual triumph over death, which 
we have already noticed in the second letter to the 
Corinthians, we find consummated in the epistle to 
the Philippians. The continuance of this present 
existence, or its cessation, is an external accident 
which scarcely affects the apostle ; in either case it 
leaves his communion w T ith Christ intact and un- 
interrupted. " For my part, to live — that is Christ ; 
and to die is my gain!" Death in itself seems to him 
desirable ; for his faith can only see in this last crisis 
a renewal of his being, and a decided advance which 
brings him nearer still to the Lord Jesus. " I am in a 



256 TH£ APOSTLE PAUL. 

strait between two things ; my desire is to remove to 
be with Christ, which would be far the best for me." 
One can imagine the absolute independence that this 
faith gave to his soul. " I know how to be content 
with what I have. I have learned how to be in want, 
and in abundance. I have been initiated into every 
condition. I know how to endure hunger, and enjoy 
plenty ; to sustain wealth, and rejoice in poverty. I 
can do everything through Christ who strengthens 
me! "(chap. iv. n-13.) Paul had now reached the 
close of his life ; and the fruit of his faith was ripe. 

It is by keeping in view the practical character of 
the epistle to the Philippians, and its entire freedom 
from dogmatic pretension, that we arrive at a just 
appreciation of the passage in chap. ii. 6-1 1, which 
now remains for our consideration. Paul, in fact, only 
refers to Jesus in this place in order to exhibit in His 
conduct the ideal type that the Christian should strive 
to imitate and reproduce. It is the law of moral 
development, that glory is won through the cross. 
The connexion existing between sufferings willingly 
accepted, sacrifice joyfully fulfilled, and the Divine re- 
ward of future glory, was an essential and inseparable 
element of Paul's conception of the Christian life in 
general (2 Cor. i. 5-7 ; iv. 11-17 ; Rom. vi. 5 and xiv. 
7). The Pauline Christology, in becoming transcen- 
dental, did not lose the ethical character belonging 
to it from the first. The cross is still the centre of 
gravity of the whole structure. We are not confronted 
here with a metaphysical abstraction, developed by 
a logical and inevitable processus ; but with a moral 
Being, who rises far above us it is true, but who never- 
theless stands on our level, and who, of His own free 
will fulfilled His destiny, as we have to fulfil ours. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS. 257 



It is only from this essentially ethical point of view 
that we can grasp Paul's real conception. 

After this, I hardly think it necessary to refute the 
interpretation of the text which Baur has given. The 
author, according to him, might have copied this 
admirable story of Jesus from that of some aeon of 
Valentinian Gnosticism — which, in aiming to make 
itself equal with the supreme God, lapsed by a 
deserved fall from the irXrjpwfjLa into a lower con- 
dition, that of the fcevcofia, and finally rose by degrees 
and through long expiation to the highest place ! 
These two conceptions are separated by a whole 
abyss ; they belong to two different worlds which 
have nothing in common ; and I seek in vain for the 
slightest connection between them. Baur quotes cer- 
tain expressions in the passage that appear to favour 
Docetism. But, as M. Reuss has justly observed, the 
idea of Docetism is not present in the term /U-op^r), 
since it is used to designate the Divine essence; nor 
in ofjLoicojjLCL, which may be found in Romans viii. 3 
(comp. chap. i. 23) ; nor in the words a^fjua and 
evpedeh, which always indicate an objective reality 
(comp. 1 Cor. vii. 31 and iv. 2 ; 2 Cor. v. 3 ; Gal. ii. 
17). Furthermore, a Docetic interpretation of this 
passage would run directly counter to the author's 
express design. How could he found the glory of 
Christ upon a humiliation, obedience, and death, 
which were only apparent ? The apostle is thinking, 
not of some celestial being, but of the historical 
Christ ; and it is His earthly life that he so admirably 
sums up in the idea of renunciation and obedience. 1 



1 See de Wette, Exegetisches Handbtcch, second edition, on 
this passage in Philippians. 

17 



25* 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



As for the idea of rcevcoaLs itself, there is no need to 
look for it in the Valentinian Gnosticism. Its germ 
had long existed in the apostle's mind. It was the 
conclusion which he was bound inevitably to reach ; 
and it enabled him to reconcile the historical stand- 
point from which he vigorously maintained the 
essential humanity of Jesus, with the metaphysical 
standpoint which led him to assert His Divine origin 
and condition. This passage in Philippians is the 
synthesis of the Christology of the great epistles 
with that of Colossians. 

It was, in fact, essential to the logic of Paul's doc- 
trine that he should conceive of the earthly condition 
of Jesus Christ as one of voluntary humiliation, and 
sum up His whole life in the idea of sacrifice (Gal. iv. 
4 ; Rom. viii. 32). The words of 2 Corinthians viii. 
9 should be called to mind : cV vfias eiTTcaxevcrev, 
irXovaios tbv. The exact bearing of this latter pas- 
sage has often been misunderstood. The word 
eirrca^evaev is not, indeed, the equivalent of eKevcoaev 
eavrov. The verb irrco^eveiv rather signifies to live 
in poverty, panpertatem gerere ; but the aorist most 
certainly indicates the time when this condition be- 
gan, when Christ became poor. 1 The impartial com- 
mentator will be compelled to see at the basis of 
this passage the idea of self-renunciation and relin- 
quishment, which moreover alone gives force to the 



1 Neuter verbs in -euco, -uw, -eco, etc., in the present tense 
express a condition, and in the aorist a becoming — i.e. the point 
at which the condition begins. Thus fSacnXevco signifies I reign, 
and ij3a(Tt\€V(ra I became king ; TricrTevw signifies 1 believe, and 
iTrtcTTevcra I became a believer. In the same way, i£rj<rev, in 
Rom. xiv. 9, signifies He became alive. See Holsten, Paulus 
unci Pel r us, p. 437. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE TH1L1PTHNS. 259 



apostle's reasoning in the context. Hence this pas- 
sage of the epistle to the Philippians is simply the 
natural development of the idea indicated in the earlier 
text. 

Having thus placed the text in its true light and 
referred it to its real historical origin, it will not be 
difficult to expound its content. The subject of the 
whole paragraph is the historical Christ, rising to 
glory through humiliation. But that this humiliation 
should take place, that there indeed should be room 
for renunciation, it was certainly necessary that Christ 
should have been already, in Himself and by nature, 
of a higher condition. This original state the apostle 
indicates in the words iv /uopcpf} Qeov vizapywv, which 
form the most exalted metaphysical definition ever 
given by Paul to the Person of Christ. They express 
a substantial relation to God, a relation that the 
expressions eintov kol\ 86^a rov Qeov (2 Cor. iv. 6), 
which are sometimes adduced as a parallel, do not 
involve. Paul has said of man in his present condi- 
tion that he is the image and glory of God (1 Cor. xi. 
7) ; he would never have said of us, as of Christ, eV 
/iopcj)fj Qeov vTrdp-fcovTes. But on the other hand, 
the expression ^opcf>rj Qeov does not mean absolute 
Divinity ; there is still beyond it that which Paul calls 
equality with God, clvat icra Qea> — a higher position 
which Christ might have thought of seizing, but 
which He did not usurp. Christ is of the Divine 
nature. But there is this difference between Him and 
God : that which He will be in the end, He has yet 
to become ; and He becomes this actually, by the full 
development of His moral being. Thus the definitive 
condition to which Christ attains — and which Paul 
describes in the tenth verse — is not a mere return 



260 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



to the point of departure, to the original condition 
indicated in ver. 6. Between these two points there 
is for Christ Himself a progress, a real development 
of His being. On the other hand, Christ is no more 
able than we are to go beyond Himself, to exceed 
the limits of His nature. His development only 
makes manifest what was inherent in Him in principle, 
and the goal, which is the Divine state, implies for a 
starting point a Divine nature and virtue. These two 
phases of development are related to each other very 
much as potentiality is to action. Christ was potentially 
from the first, that which He finally became in actua- 
lity. Thus the child, being by its very nature ev 
fiopcf)f} av9p(t)7rov, finally attains full humanity. The 
fiopcj)rj &eov, therefore, indicates the general form of 
Christ's being ; but is, if I may so speak, an empty 
form which has to be filled — that is to say, spiritually 
realized. There was in Him the capacity to receive 
and contain all the plenitude of the Divine life 
{i:\y]pw}xa deoTrjTOs). 

This development of the Person of Christ is ac- 
complished through a series of different periods or 
stages, which the apostle specifies and analyses in the 
text. The first, wholly negative, lies in the fact that 
He did not seek through egotism and pride to place 
Himself on a level with God, to usurp prematurely 
the Divine equality (ov% dpiray/ibv rjyrja-aro to elvai 
Icra Sew). He resisted this first temptation to aggran- 
dise and elevate Himself by a violent self-assertion, 
— called by Paul an act of robbery. Possibly this 
phrase alludes to Genesis iii. 5 and Matthew iv. 3. 

The second stage — one that is, on the contrary, 
essentially positive — is denoted by the words iicevwaev 
eavrbv, which have been well translated, and without 



THE EPISTLE TO THE PH1LIPPIANS. 261 



exaggeration, He annihilated Himself. We must not 
here conceive of the Johannine Logos in the bosom 
of the Father, already possessed of His full existence 
and Divine glory, as sacrificing His essence and 
destroying Himself in order to be born again and to 
attain full development. There is something incon- 
ceivable in the notion of a being who should transform 
and metamorphose himself in this way ; it lies quite 
outside that sphere of moral life within which Paul 
always confined himself. The pre-existence of nature 
that he attributes to Christ is within the God- 
head. Christ, who was by the order of His being 
(genere essendi) of Divine nature, renounces the Divine 
form of His essence, and annihilates His personal 
will in the presence of the Father's will. In a word, 
He sacrifices Himself. This annihilation is not a 
metapliysical transitbstantiation, which is an impossible 
conception ; it is a moral act, analogous to that which 
every spiritual being is called upon to perform, in 
order that he may become truly himself and fulfil his 
destiny. The words iicevuxjev eavrbv are explained 
by the three participles which follow, in well-marked 
gradation : fAop(f)7]v Sov\ov Xaftcov — Christ who was by 
nature iv p-opcpj} Kvpiov, took upon Him the fiopcfrrjv 
oov\ov, that He might develop Himself in this lower 
condition ; He sacrificed His dignity, He became like 
men ; and, finally, was found as a mere man. The 
two remaining clauses, iv d/jLOLGo/juaTL avOpcoircov yevo- 
fievos, evpedels &>? avOpcoiros, are only the explanation, 
the objective realization of the popcpr} BovXov. 

The third stage, rising upon and above the other 
two, is the obedience (yevo/ievos virrjicoos;) — an obedience 
which found its goal and consummation in the death 
on the cross. This development therefore is simply 



262 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

an ever deepening humiliation. But this humiliation 
is at the same time an exaltation; and it is here that 
the great law of the moral life is manifested. In 
His constant self-renunciation Christ actualized the 
virtualities of His nature. Every sacrifice left Him 
ennobled and enriched. Reaching the lowest depth 
of His humiliation, in His death on the cross, He 
attained the very height of His glory. Thus Jesus 
fulfilled His original destiny, and arrived at last at 
a condition of complete and actual Divine royalty. 
" Therefore," as Paul has so finely said, " God has 
supremely exalted Him, and given Him a name 
above every name : that at the name of Jesus every 
knee should bend, in heaven, upon earth, and under 
the earth ; and that every tongue should confess that 
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." 
This is the final summit reached by Paul's doctrine. 
It had but to take one step more to attain the idea 
of the Aoyos. This conception cannot have been 
unknown to him. If he has never applied this name 
to his Master, it was certainly from a fixed deter- 
mination. Nor must we be surprised. His conception 
of Christology is radically different from that of the 
Fourth Gospel, which is a Christology formed from 
the Divine standpoint. Hence, as it appears to us, 
tJie Word made flesh of St. John never comes to be 
fully and simply man. Paul's Christology, on the 
contrary, was framed from the human standpoint. It 
has an anthropological origin, and retains something 
of this essentially human character even in its meta- 
physical form.. This is doubtless the reason why the 
Christ of Paul never comes to be simply and abso- 
lutely God. In His full Godhead He still retains the 
features of His glorified humanity. 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE THREE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 

IT now only remains to consider the three Pastoral 
epistles. It is somewhat unfortunate for them, 
to begin with, that they do not belong to the organic 
whole formed by Paul's other letters, and are related 
to it less as an integral part than as an appendix, 
adding nothing of essential moment to the results 
already obtained. 

It is impossible, in fact, to speak here of a new 
advance of Paulinism. True, it is presented to us 
in a different phase ; but instead of growing richer, 
it seems impoverished. With the epistle to the Phi- 
lippians the living progress ceases ; with the Pastoral 
letters the conservative tradition begins. Paul's 
doctrine is there ; but the soul which sustained and 
vivified it appears already to have left it. The power- 
ful assimilation and fruitful activity of life is at an 
end ; the body, still recognisable, seems stiffened and 
chilled ; the dialectical articulations of the system are 
no longer perceptible. In any case, we have reached 
a point of arrest. This statement, incontrovertible 
under any hypothesis, is not intended to decide the 
critical problem raised by the origin of the three 
letters. They present a series of enigmas which, in 
the utter absence of historical information about the 

263 



264 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



latter period of the apostle's life, will long remain 
insoluble. 

We humbly confess that, after a long, critical study 
of the subject, we remain completely undecided. 1 
The defenders of the epistles do indeed succeed in 
making us question their apocryphal origin, but not 
in convincing us of their authenticity. Their ad- 
versaries easily throw doubt upon the authenticity of 
these writings, but without enabling us to understand 
their later origin. We do not wish to enter upon the 
discussion here ; but there is one point which we con- 
sider beyond all question and which we shall proceed 
to establish, — viz. that these three letters are posterior 
to all the others, and cannot be included in the 
scheme of Paul's life given in the Acts of the Apostles. 
If they are authentic, they belong to a later period 
of his life, of which we are wholly ignorant. 

Let us notice, to begin with, a preliminary fact ot 
decisive importance, and one fully established by the 
studies of de Wette and Baur ; namely, the intimate 
connexion of the three epistles, and their perfect 
resemblance to each other. This resemblance not 
only obliges us to admit all the three as authentic 
or to reject them together as apocryphal, but abso- 
lutely prevents our ascribing them to separate periods 
of Paul's life. The style, the basis of thought, the 
heresies combated, the ecclesiastical situation pour- 
trayed, the practical counsels laid down — in a word, 



1 During the last twenty years we have more than once taken 
up this very obscure problem. We must confess that the 
reasons against the authenticity of the three letters, which 
perhaps were drawn up with the help of a few of Paul's notes, 
and by his disciples, seem to us to carry the day. See En- 
cyclopedic dcs sciences religieuses ; art. " Pastorales," 



THE THREE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 265 

everything about the letters is similar, not to say 
identical. In some instances, we are tempted to think, 
they repeat and copy each other (comp. 1 Tim. iv. 1, 
7 ; 2 Tim. ii. 23 ; and Tit. iii. 9, i. 14 : 1 Tim. iii. 2, and 
Tit. i. 7 : 1 Tim. iv. 1 ff., and 2 Tim. iii. I : 1 Tim. 
ii. 7, and 2 Tim. i. 11). Finally, besides this mutual 
resemblance, we must further note that they are all 
distinguished from the other epistles by their common 
cast of doctrine ; and in these essential differences 
they share alike. 

This incontestable and uncontested fact at once 
condemns, beyond appeal, any hypothesis dating the 
letters in question at intervals of four or five years 
from each other, or which puts any one of Paul's other 
epistles between them. There is, in fact, only one 
supposition which adequately explains their funda- 
mental resemblance — viz. that they were written 
within a very short space of time, and a long while 
after all the rest, at a period when the circumstances 
surrounding the apostle had changed, and when 
perhaps the burden of age and his prolonged trials 
had left their traces on his genius. The Pastoral 
epistles certainly seem to betray, here and there, a 
sort of weariness and enfeeblement. 

Of all the attempts made to find a likely place for 
these epistles in the historical framework of Paul's 
life, the most ingenious is unquestionably the hypo- 
thesis of M. Reuss. 1 This theologian assuming that 
the apostle, during his three years' sojourn at Ephesus, 
made a circular tour to Crete, Corinth, Macedonia, 
and Epirus, formed for the epistle to Titus and the 



1 History of the Sacred Scriptures of the New Testament, 
§§ 87-92. He has since abandoned this hypothesis. 



266 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



first to Timothy a ring fairly natural and sufficient 
to link them with this period of Paul's life. The 
second epistle to Timothy might have been written 
later, at Rome, before the epistle to the Philippians. 
Thus two of the Pastoral epistles would be placed 
between the epistle to the Galatians and the first 
epistle to the Corinthians. But such an idea is 
wholly inadmissible, and to our thinking incompre- 
hensible. How, we repeat with M. Renan, could Paul 
have penned these mild effusions just after the epistle 
to the Galatians, and on the eve of writing those to 
the Corinthians ? He must have abandoned his usual 
style on leaving Ephesus, and resumed it upon his 
return, except when he reverted a few years later to 
the diction employed during this supposed journey, 
in writing to Timothy a second time. 1 An interval of 
at least four years would separate this second letter 
to Timothy from the other two ; and what is a still 
greater difficulty than the number of years, is that 
during this interval the apostle must have written the 
epistles to the Ephesians, the Colossians, and Phile- 
mon. Will any one suppose that Paul in writing to 
• a friend, after this space of time, can have made 
extracts for the purpose from some of his old letters ? 
The thing is inconceivable. 

Besides, this literary difficulty is by no means the 
most serious one. The character of the heresies con- 
troverted, and the ecclesiastical situation these letters 
present, constitute others which are in themselves 
decisive. We might further discuss the sort of 
heretics to whom the Pastoral epistles refer. But it 
is absolutely certain that they are not the Judaizing 

1 Renan : Saint Paul, Introd., p. 31. 



THE THREE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 267 



teachers of Galatia and Corinth, and do not in any 
wise resemble them It would be more easy to find a 
connecting link between them and the false teachers 
of Colossae. There is the same arbitrary asceticism, 
resting on a similar dualism of principles (1 Tim. 
iv. 1-5), and accompanied by fantastic speculations, 
as senseless as they were useless. Their dualistic 
doctrines, however, belong to a far more highly- 
developed and more dangerous form of Gnosticism 
than that to which the epistles to the Ephesians and 
Colossians refer. In these latter we find no more 
than a tendency to these notions : here, they have 
already taken shape and are distinctly formulated ; 
they are sharply distinguished from the evangelical 
teaching, and openly oppose themselves to it. 

Any one who still wishes to separate the three 
letters by placing an interval of four or five years 
between them, is logically compelled to admit that 
these heresies existed before the composition of the 
epistles to the Corinthians, and were even at that 
period threatening the Church's existence. But is it 
conceivable that such a danger had arisen at Ephesus 
at the time when Paul had stayed but a year in this 
city, and when the Christian community was only 
beginning to establish itself? If the danger did exist, 
why do we find no indication of it in the two epistles 
to the Corinthians, or in the epistle to the Romans ? 
Besides, if two of the Pastorals are contemporary with 
Galatians and Corinthians, how is it that they bear 
no trace of the strenuous conflict with the Judaizers, 
which at this time most certainly engrossed the 
apostle's thought and life? The epistles must of 
necessity be subsequent to the address at Miletus. 
To place them earlier is an utter moral impossibility. 



268 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

In one particular this impossibility becomes, in- 
deed, matter of positive fact : I refer to the heresy of 
Hymenaeus, Alexander, and Philetus, against which 
the epistles to Timothy are both directed (i Tim. i. 
20; comp. 2 Tim. ii. 17). It is sufficient to compare 
these two passages to feel certain that the letters 
could not have been separated by a long interval. 
One might even think that the passage in the second 
letter was written before that in the first. Hymenaeus, 
who in the latter is excommunicated, does not seem 
to be so as yet at the date of the other epistle. 

The general ecclesiastical situation implied in the 
three letters can only have occurred somewhat later. 
One year after Paul's first preaching at Ephesus, we 
cannot understand the possibility either of the de- 
velopment that these heresies had already assumed, or 
of the moral disorders that the apostle points out ; or 
his counsels respecting widows, bishops, and deacons ; 
or, in short, the ecclesiastical code that we find in 
these epistles. Let any one who wishes to realize the 
difference in the condition of the times, compare the 
picture drawn of Church life in the Corinthian com- 
munity (1 Cor. xii.-xiv.) with the situation apparent 
in the Pastoral letters. The period of tumultuous 
spontaneity has been succeeded by that of prudent 
and orderly administration. 

Without pausing to discuss more fully the indi- 
vidual details of this hypothesis, details which raise 
many other difficulties of a geographical and historical 
nature, 1 let us boldly conclude that the three epistles 

1 1 Tim. i. 3, in particular, is a stumbling block to any hypo- 
thesis which intercalates the letter to Titus and the first to 
Timothy in Paul's supposed circular tour. 



THE THREE PASTORAL EPISTLES. =269 



in question belong to one period of Paul's life and 
constitute a cycle of their own, of later date in the 
history of his doctrine. Either Paul's career did not 
end at the point where the Acts leaves off, or else 
the Pastoral letters are not authentic. Such is the 
dilemma in which we are landed ; and I do not 
think there is any possibility of escape from it. This 
dilemma, unfortunately, at the same time creates a 
circle within which the action of criticism is confined. 
Historical information of any certainty on the latter 
period of Paul's life is entirely wanting. While the 
epistles require this unknown period, and a second 
captivity, as a basis for their apostolic origin, — on the 
other hand, the hypothesis of a second captivity 
scarcely finds any real foundation except in the three 
Pastoral letters. 

It is enough for our purpose to have proved that 
the three epistles actually represent the latest stage 
of Paulinism. We may leave undecided the question 
whether this last transformation took place in the 
apostle's lifetime, or only after his death. In what- 
ever way it is settled, it cannot be denied that the 
letters belong to the history of the Pauline system. 
They are not unworthy of the great apostle, either 
in form or substance. 1 The idea of the evangelical 
ministry which they unfold is unmistakably his. We 
meet here and there with the profound mysticism of 
his former letters (2 Tim. i. 9, 10; ii. 9-1 1). The con- 
troversial argumentations of Galatians and Romans 
have disappeared ; but the doctrine that underlies 
those epistles is expressed in all its energy and pro- 



1 See the excellent defence of them made by M. Reuss, 
History of the Sacred Scriptures of the N. T., §§ 88-92. 



270 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

fundity (Tit. iii. 5-7). It is justifiable therefore, and 
even necessary, before concluding, to pourtray the dog- 
matic character of these three letters. 

A very serious difficulty, under the hypothesis of 
their unauthenticity, is to determine the dogmatic 
design and end that the author had in view when 
inventing them. What strikes us most of all in these 
letters is their practical bearing. It is easy enough, 
from this point of view, to connect them with Paul's 
other epistles, and to explain their special physiog- 
nomy. The epistle to the Philippians proves the 
practical turn that Paul's doctrine took in the latter 
years of his life, and the simplification and condensation 
thus effected in his ideas. The dialectic apparatus 
which had served to formulate and defend them was 
gradually disappearing, and the results obtained were 
summed up in short and simple affirmations. 

Also the conservative character of the epistles may 
very well be connected with a traditional element 
which is not wanting in any of the earlier letters, 
and which at all times was an essential feature of the 
apostle's teaching (1 Cor. xv. 1-11 ; 2 Thess. ii. 15 ; 
Eph. iv. 3 ; Phil. iii. 1 ; Col. ii. 6 ; Rom. xvi. 17). We 
must never weary of repeating, because it is con- 
tinually forgotten, that Paul was an apostle before he 
was a theologian. To him the need of conservation 
was more urgent than that of innovation. His gospel 
was, above everything else, a message that he had 
received, and that he had to deliver and defend. He 
preaches not only with authority, but by authority, 
and the greatest misfortune which can befall those 
who have received his message is to betray the trust, 
or to allow it to be perverted (Gal. i. 6-9). 

In this way the character of these epistles can 



THE THREE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 271 



easily be understood. They are summed up in one 
thought: Guard the good deposit {2 Tim. i. 14). This 
good deposit, which must not be allowed to be lost 
or corrupted, naturally becomes, in contrast with the 
errors of all kinds arising in the Churches, the right 
way, the sound doctrine (\6<yo<z vyirjs, vytaivovTes 
\6yoi). With this idea of orthodoxy arose of necessity 
the correlative conception of heresy. Beside this per- 
severance in the received faith, the author dwells no 
less forcibly upon the necessity of purity of life, and 
launches out into most vigorous practical exhortations. 
But this is not done without involving some degree of 
separation between dogma and practical life, a separa- 
tion which is not to be found in the earlier epistles. 
Here Christianity evidently tends to resolve itself 
into a doctrine^ and a morality. The organic bond 
between faith and life, which in Paul's great letters 
was so close, is loosened, if not already broken. In 
that consists the real inferiority of these later epistles. 
The author, whoever he may be, does not limit 
himself to abstract exhortations to maintain faithfully 
the received tradition. He carefully indicates how 
this deposit can and ought to be preserved, entrusted 
as it was to the Church at large, which lives by it and 
is responsible for it. The Church is " the pillar and 
stay of the truth" (1 Tim. iii. 15). But that is not 
enough ; it is necessary to commit this charge into 
individual hands. As Paul himself delivered the crood 
deposit to his disciples, they in their turn must con- 
fide it to sure hands. Hence the repeated directions 
about the choice of bishops, deacons, and of elders in 
general, — -directions which occupy so much space in 
the letters, and are thus connected directly with their 
general and leading idea. 



272 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

By all the features we have described — the sepa- 
ration of dogma and morality, the conception of the 
Church, of tradition and apostolical succession — these 
epistles furnish the transition from Paulinism to the 
Catholicism of the second century, which was in fact 
a synthesis of the various tendencies of the apostolic 
age. — The creative epoch has come to an end. 

The close of the apostle's life is involved in im- 
penetrable obscurity. The practical welfare of the 
Church of Christ, which had been his first care, was 
doubtless also his last thought. It was not his 
anxiety so much to complete and crown his system 
worthily, as to finish before his death the work that 
the Master had given him to do. This great work 
is now accomplished. The heroic combatant may 
at last enjoy the repose that in his lifetime neither 
his will, nor conscience, nor intellect ever knew. 

Paul was only a disciple. This, from first to last, 
was his role and his ambition. But his life certainly 
presents to our eyes the most heroic effort humanity 
has made to apprehend and appropriate the Divine 
teaching and life of the Master. Among all His 
disciples, Jesus has had no greater. 



BOOK V. 

ORGANIC FORM OF PAULS THEOLOGICAL 
SYSTEM. 

WE have followed the progressive course oi 
Paul's doctrine throughout his epistles. We 
have left it, in some sort, to disclose itself in its suc- 
ceeding manifestations. It now remains for us to 
apprehend and set it forth as an organic whole. We 
wish to trace out the strong and delicate articulation 
of the structure that we have watched as it rose- 
slowly upon our view. 

Ancient theology never seems to have suspected 
that the apostle's doctrine had an organism of its 
own, which ought to be valued as an essential ele- 
ment in its truth. The epistles served it simply as 
a collection of dicta probantia. The general scheme 
of dogma being officially prescribed, it only remained 
to distribute these passages according to the tradi- 
tional rubrics : Theology, Christology, Pneumatology, 
Anthropology, etc. Did the dogmatic teachers arrive 
at the Pauline theology by this violent procedure ? 
Certainly not. They had cut it to pieces. Nothing 
was left of it but scattered and lifeless fragments — 
membra disjecta. 

Usteri, whose labours we have already noticed, 

*73 js 



274 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



was the first to perceive that, in order to have Paul's 
doctrine in its life and entirety, we must apprehend 
and unfold it in its own organic character, and make 
its inner cohesion and logical unity apparent. He 
therefore devoted all his efforts to reconstructing the 

o 

Pauline system ; and his work is an early and note- 
worthy attempt at a sound historical interpretation. 
Usteri indeed was not sufficiently independent of the 
prevailing ideas of his time ; he viewed Paul's system 
too much through that of Schleiermacher. Never- 
theless his attempt opened up a new path, and led 
men's minds to a truer understanding of this great 
system of doctrine. He divided the Pauline system 
into two parts, corresponding with two historical 
periods : the epoch previous to Christianity {y^povoi 
rrj? ayvolas), and the epoch of Christianity itself 
(irXrjpwua tcov y_p6va)v). The first period embraces 
the development of Paganism and Judaism, both 
being comprehended under the dogmatic conception 
of sin. The reign of sin and death over humanity, 
the relation between sin and the law, the power- 
lessness of the latter to justify man, and the ardent 
longing for redemption that was the outcome of 
this long preparatory period, — these are the topics 
naturally included within it. 

In the second part, Usteri penetrates to the heart 
of the Pauline theology. He studies in succession 
the work of redemption in the individual ; the develop- 
ment of this work in the Christian society, or Church ; 
and, lastly, its consummation in the final realization 
of the kingdom of God upon earth. 

We cannot but recognise the inherent sequence of 
this exposition. But it is also very easy to indicate 
its. serious defect. The theory of man's justification, 



ORGANIC FORM OF THEOLOGICAL SYSTEM. 275 



with its negative and positive aspect and its essential 
antithesis between the law and faith, is maimed and 
disjointed ; in order to reconstruct it, its scattered 
elements have to be sought in all directions. Thus 
Paul's closely woven system is torn asunder ; and 
the rent proceeds from its very centre, with a most 
disastrous effect on the entire construction. The ex- 
position of the Pauline theology has become that of 
the historical scheme of Divine revelation. No doubt 
this idea supplied an essential factor in the apostle's 
conception ; but it is not the only one, nor the most 
important. Paul did not conceive this idea of the 
historical scheme of redemption a priori^ and .from 
the outset. He only arrived at it, as we have seen, 
by a long and laborious progress. The anthropo- 
logical evidently preceded the historical point of view. 
Justification by faith without the law is, both in 
experience and theory, the logical antecedent of the 
other question. It was from this subjective side that 
Paul's doctrine received its first impulse ; and with 
that we must of necessity begin. Xow this individual 
point of view, this anthropological factor, is com- 
pletely sacrificed in Usteri's scheme. Hence it has 
no substantial basis ; and though it may have fas- 
cinated one's mind for a time, it has not secured 
final acceptance. 

Next to this work of Usteri, the most remarkable 
exposition of Paulinism is undeniably that of Baur. 1 



1 We refer now to the exposition of Paul's doctrine contained 
in the Paulus of Baur. We still prefer it, notwithstanding its 
omissions, to that which the learned Professor afterwards gave 
in his Neutesta7?ientliche Theology, published in 1864, after the 
death of the author. 



276 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



It shows a decided advance upon the former. It is 
open to correction, and completion in its details ; but 
it lays down the true method of reconstruction, 
and fixes the right point of departure. Baur was 
very sensible of the radical defect of Usteri's expo- 
sition, and fully succeeded in rectifying it. He has 
thoroughly apprehended and demonstrated the psy- 
chological origin of Paulinism. He bases his recon- 
struction on the great idea of justification by faith, 
preserving its characteristic antithetical form and 
dialectic movement. He then proceeds to trace the 
development of this idea in social life and the sphere 
of history, and shows how from these premises was 
logically deduced that great philosophy of history 
which defined the relation of Judaism and Paganism 
respectively to the Gospel. At this point Baur 
stopped short. The critical deductions from which he 
set out scarcely admitted of his further advance. We 
may however, and indeed we must, charge him with 
having misconceived and slighted the metaphysical 
principles of Paulinism. He has briefly touched 
upon them in a short chapter entitled " Secondary 
Questions " (Nebenfrage)i). But is it permissible to 
call the Pauline conceptions of God, of the Person 
of Christ, of predestination and revelation, secondary 
questions? Are they not, on the contrary, so many 
essential keystones, that preserve the harmony and 
solidity of the entire structure ? While Usteri's ex- 
position appeared to want foundation, this of Baur 
may be said to want its topstone. 

The exposition presented by M. Reuss, in his turn, 
is the most scrupulous and exact in detail that has 
ever been given. But on the special point which 
we are now considering, viz, the logical structure of 



ORGANIC FORM OF THEOLOGICAL SYSTEM. 277 



the system, it can hardly be said to show any real 
advance on the preceding theories. M. Reuss has 
correctly indicated the general character of Paul's 
theology ; he has pointed out its primary origin in 
the apostle's moral and religious experience ; and he 
has even sketched its main outlines with precision 
and certainty. But the psychological and historical 
aspects of the subject run into each other, and are so 
blended together that neither of them is brought out 
with sufficient emphasis nor developed with logical 
completeness. The rich philosophy of history, so 
powerfully wrought out in Paul's mind, fades and 
disappears. Neither is the order of the individual 
doctrines as they pass under review, nor their con- 
nexion with the generative idea of the system, always 
thoroughly apprehended. In short, in this very lucid 
and facile exposition of Paul's doctrine there is more 
art than logic. 

Obviously, it is no easy undertaking to attempt to 
reproduce, without distortion or injury, the internal 
organization of the apostle's system of thought. We 
should even draw back from the task, were retreat 
permissible. But it is too late. From the historical 
exposition that we have just given is logically and 
spontaneously evolved an organic system which it 
behoves us to expound. We have not created it 
a priori ; history itself has given it us, and in the 
name of history alone we finally proceed to set it 
forth. Our sketch of the Pauline system will, in effect, 
furnish a brief summary of the history whose course 
we have followed up to this point. 

Paul's theology has its roots in the fact of his con- 
version. Each of his ideas may be said ,to have been 
a fact of inward experience, a feeling, before it was 



278 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

formulated by the understanding. We must not be 
misled by its external dress, by the scholastic forms 
which moulded the apostle's doctrine ; for at the 
bottom there was nothing at all abstract or formal 
about it. Deduction is not its favourite process. On 
the contrary, it always advances from the concrete 
to the abstract, and rises from experience to prin- 
ciples. Paul's is not a speculative theology, logically 
deduced from an abstract conception ; it is un- 
mistakably positive, having its starting point in the 
internal reality of faith. It would be impossible to 
find anything more vigorous and active in growth 
than Paul's doctrine. It is, when properly understood, 
simply the direct transcription of his experience, 
the pure outflow of his moral and religious life, 
which ascending from the depths of his soul into the 
sphere of the intellect, there finally expands into its 
theoretical form. That is why pious souls have read 
and ever will read with profit these letters, apparently 
so difficult. Behind their scholastic apparatus, the 
consciousness of the humble Christian perceives and 
responds to that of the great apostle. A corre- 
sponding inward experience establishes between 
them by anticipation a mysterious harmony, a secret 
understanding ; and it very often happens that these 
simple souls comprehend the mind of Paul better 
than professed scholars. He who has never in any 
degree experienced the inward change which trans- 
formed Saul of Tarsus will never fully understand 
his writings ; there is a hidden depth in them to 
which he cannot penetrate. 

Paul's theology being of this character, it is no 
wonder that it was not at once completed. His 
doctrine always followed the course of his religious 



0RGAX1C FORM OF THEOLOGICAL SYSTEM. 279 



experience ; and never once outran it. Originated in 
the sphere of personal life, it advanced by a process 
of generalization to the spheres of social life and 
history ; until, striving continually after unity and 
ultimate principles, it finally attained its full expan- 
sion in the sphere of metaphysics. It is through this 
upward progress and constant enlargement that we 
must comprehend it. We shall thus follow the actual 
course that its history has marked out for us. 

The three different zones traversed by Paul's 
thought, correspond in fact to the three great periods 
of his life. The first was that of personal faith and 
confession ; here the subjective aspect predominated 
in his theology. The conflicts of the second stage 
compelled the apostle to bring himself into harmony 
with the past, and thus led him to the historical 
standpoint which prevails in the major epistles. Paul 
now came to survey the whole destiny of humanity, 
from the first to the second Adam, and from Christ 
to the end of time. Finally, in his later letters, his 
mind passes the bounds which separate history from 
metaphysics ; he endeavours to find in God Himself 
the first and final cause, the beginning and the end 
of the great drama enacted through the course of 
time. 

We must not make a forced separation between 
these three parts of Paul's system, and the three 
periods of his life. Their logical connexion is very 
close. The apostle's historical views arise from his 
anthropology, his speculative ideas from his scheme 
of history ; and all these developments were alike 
contained in his early faith, just as the plant lies hid 
in the germ which produces it. 

Involved at the outset in the violent antithesis of 



2So THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

the law and faith, Paul's doctrine in its development 
instinctively tended to rise above it. In the end it 
succeeded. It is in the psychological sphere, in fact, 
that we find the fundamental opposition between 
works and grace, flesh and spirit, bondage and liberty, 
most strongly marked. In the sphere of social life 
and history, the antithesis assumes a wider and dif- 
ferent character ; it reappears in the contrast between 
the old and new Covenants, between Adam and 
Christ, between the period of tutelage and of in- 
dependence. But as early as the epistle to the 
Romans, this opposition has diminished ; Judaism 
and Paganism become subordinate to the Gospel ; 
and the antithesis gives way to the higher conception 
of an evolution in the Divine plan. Finally, in the 
sphere of metaphysics, all dualism terminates. In 
the supreme conception of God, all contradictions are 
reconciled and all differences disappear. The final 
word of the Pauline theology is this: God is all in all. 
Thus Paul's doctrine originated and grew up, like 
a magnificent tree, rooted deeply in the soil of the 
Christian consciousness and towering to the heavens. 

SYNOPTICAL TABLE OF THE PAULINE 
SYSTEM. 

Generative principle. — The Person of Christ, the 
principle of the Christian consciousness. 

I. 

THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE IN THE SPHERE OF 
PSYCHOLOGY. 

A ntJiropology. 
I. Impossibility of attaining justification by the 



ORGANIC FORM OF THEOLOGICAL SYSTEM. 281 



law. — cifiapTta, <rap%. — 6 vo/jlo^, 6 6dvaro<;. — Negative 
development. 

2. Justification by faith. — rf Ziicaiocrvvr) Qeov. — 
X070? rod aravpov. — rj irlcni^. — fj fey?/. — Positive de- 
velopment. - 

II. 

THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE IN THE SPHERE OF 
SOCIAL LIFE AND HISTORY. 

Religious Philosophy of History. 

1. Christ and the Church, — atofia Xpicrrov. 

2. The old and the new Covenant : r\ iTrayyeXua, 
6 vofios, 7] ttIcftis. 

3. Adam and Christ ; or, the ages of humanity. 

4. Eschatology, — to reXo?. 

5. Faith, hope, love. 

III. 

THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE IN THE SPHERE OF 
METAPHYSICS. 

Theology. 

1. Grace and Predestination: 1) %api<?, >/ Trp66eais 
tou Beov. 

2. Christology, — 6 XpccrTos. 

3. The Father, the Lord, the Holy Spirit: 6 IlaTijp, 
6 Kvpios, to ayi.ov Uvevfjia. 

4. The conception of God : ©to? ra iravra ev iraaiv. 



CHAPTER I. 



THE PERSON OF CHRIST, THE PRINCIPLE OF THE 
CHRISTIAN CONSCIOUSNESS. 

IN Paul's view, the only principle of the Christian 
consciousness is the Person of Jesus Christ, which 
characterizes, defines, and constitutes it. It is im- 
portant to state clearly the intimate and peculiar 
relation existing between the apostle's regenerate con- 
sciousness and the actual Person of Jesus. 

Paul was never a disciple of the crucified One, in 
the sense in which he was formerly a disciple of 
Gamaliel. It was not his business to be eternally 
repeating the Master's words, or even commenting 
on them as the rabbi explained or recited the pre- 
cepts of the law. To Paul, this reproduction of a 
traditional text, this knowledge learned by rote, 
could only have been a dead and death-giving letter 
(huaicovia 7paytf^a.TO?, htaKovia 0avdrov iv <ypd/j.fjLa,Ti,, 
2 Cor. hi. 6, 7). He never regarded Jesus in the 
light of a Teacher of wisdom, whose smallest words 
one must be careful to treasure up. In an external 
tradition of this kind he would have only seen a 
carnal and unfruitful knowledge. 

Beyond this inferior stage, this wisdom of the 
schools, there is a deeper and more vital method of 
learning. It lies in the disciple's devoted effort to 



THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE. 283 

assimilate his master's method and spirit, and to 
reproduce them in his own life and thought. Thus 
Plato, taking his inspiration from Socrates, continued 
and completed the Socratic philosophy. The master 
in this case is not merely an initiator, he is still 
more an ideal which men contemplate and strive 
to reproduce. Undoubtedly Paul contemplated and 
admired in this fashion that ideal life of Jesus, in 
which he delighted to perceive and display the per- 
fect standard of man's spiritual development (fjuerpov 
r)\iKia$, Eph. iv. 13). With his attention concentrated 
on this Divine type, he endeavoured to realize it more 
and more fully in himself. 

And yet this relationship, intimate as it was, does 
not fully explain the new consciousness of the apostle. 
To him Christ was more than a great ideal. Ex- 
pressions like the following, which occur so often in 
Paul's writings — Christ is my life : As for myself I 
live no longer ; it is Christ who lives in me — evidently 
go further, and reveal a unique and peculiar relation 
between his consciousness and the Person of Jesus, 
such as could not possibly exist between one man 
and another. 

In every man, however great he may be, there is, 
in truth, a material element which cannot and ought 
not to enter into ourselves, an element which the 
mind cannot assimilate. The most enthusiastic and 
faithful disciple has always to make a distinction 
between the mind of his master and its outward 
form, the husk that contains and limits it. In other 
words, there is in every human personality a negative 
element, a residuum which our admiration sets aside 
and ignores. This limitation separates and always 
will separate the adherence of the disciple from the 



2S4 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

faith of the believer ; it distinguishes enthusiasm 
from adoration. There is but one Being in whom 
God is all, and who can become all in us. Because 
Jesus was able to say, " He that hath seen Me hath 
seen the Father," therefore He could give His own 
Person as the object of the soul's faith and love, as 
its veritable sustenance. His personality is so per- 
fectly holy, so entirely spiritual, that in accepting it 
we receive it as a whole, without making any dis- 
tinction or division. Jesus .was, like no other, the 
spiritual Alan. As a quickening spirit {irvevfjua feoo- 
itolovv, i Cor. xv. 45), He becomes a principle of life 
for other spirits. Paul even goes further : he declares 
that the Lord is actually the Spirit (2 Cor. iii. 17). 
Hence His office, and His power. That which is 
merely metaphor, when we speak of a philosopher 
as living again in his disciples, is a spiritual reality 
when applied to Jesus in relation to Christians. 
Christ was not only the Founder of the Church ; He 
is still its principle of life, the inner soul which causes 
its constant growth and makes its death impossible. 

Paul, then, was not merely the disciple or the 
imitator of Jesus. Nor did he regard himself as a 
new incarnation of the same spirit, which would imply 
that the first had only a relative and temporary value. 
He became a member of Christ ; he was possessed by 
Him. He had the invincible assurance that Christ 
was not only the cause, but the ever active Creator 
of his spiritual life and thought. No one must re- 
present Paul as having a religious genius of the 
nature of that possessed by Jesus of Nazareth ! 
Jesus is the Master ; Paul is the slave. This daring 
genius bears the yoke; and the independence of which 
he boasts, and which has sometimes been so much 



THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE. 



misunderstood, is in reality nothing but an absolute 
dependence upon Christ. His freedom sprang from 
his faith, and would have disappeared with it. In 
short, that which Jehovah was to the consciousness of 
the Old Testament prophets, Jesus became to the 
consciousness of His apostle. He speaks in the name 
of Jesus, as they spoke in the name of the LORD. 

But the Lord being actually the Spirit, His entrance 
into our hearts is at the same time the outpouring 
of the Holy Spirit within us. Accordingly, Paul 
distinctly calls this Spirit the Spirit of Christ. The 
Spirit thenceforward forms the new essence of the 
regenerate consciousness. By virtue of it we are 
transformed and become, like Jesus Christ, spiritual 
men, Trvev/iariKoL This constant renewal is a spiri- 
tualization, a permanent glorification of our whole 
being, physical and moral at once. We put off the 
bonds of the flesh and rise to liberty, to perfect and 
eternal communion with God. Christianity being a 
religion of the Spirit, thus becomes the absolute reli- 
gion. It completely realizes the highest aspiration 
of every religious consciousness, — union with God. 
In it all barriers are overthrown, and the final veil 
rent asunder. We may now at last behold God face 
to face. 



CHAPTER II. 

THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE IN THE SPHERE OF 
PSYCHOLOGY (ANTHROPOLOGY). 

THE prime necessity of Paul's consciousness was 
righteousness. This idea of rigliteoasness, 
derived by him from the Old Testament, linked to- 
gether the two periods of his life, the Jewish and the 
Christian. It sways the whole of his teaching, as it 
engrossed his whole existence. 

Righteousness is the expression of the normal 
relation between the will of man and the will of God. 
It is the supreme end of every human life. In that 
alone can we find rest and happiness. But as soon 
as man attempts to realize it, he immediately finds 
a contrary principle rising up within him — viz. sin, 
which is the very negation of righteousness. From 
the conflict between these two opposing principles 
the entire Pauline theology was engendered. 

Just as Paul's life was divided by his conversion 
into two parts, one of which was the radical nega- 
tion of the other, so also his Christian belief was 
formulated in a sweeping antithesis : justification 
impossible under the law ; justification obtained by 
faith. The apostle always developed its two terms on 
parallel lines, because each is defined and explained 

by the other. As Baur justly perceived, this opposi- 

2S6 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 287 



tion is the double aspect of one and the same theory, 
which is completely summed up in these two con- 
tradictory propositions : 

I. ef epycov vofiov ov BtKaLcoOijaerai iracra aap^ 
evoo-TTLov Qeov (Rom. hi. 20). 

II. 6 avOpwTTos Si/caiovrac Triarec (Rom. iii. 28). 

I. Legal Justification Impossible. 

Man will never be justified before God by the works 
of the Law. — In the first three chapters of his letter 
to the Romans Paul establishes this first thesis, by 
means of the testimony of moral and religious ex- 
perience. The fact of sin, denounced by the indi- 
vidual conscience, was indeed the starting point of 
his religious thought. But it does not stop at this 
first stage. In that which every one experiences in 
his own life, the apostle recognises and points out a 
general and universal law of the history of humanity. 
All men without distinction, both Jews and Gentiles, 
are the slaves of sin. A fact so general must have 
its explanation in human nature. Sin is universal, 
— because it is inevitable. The apostle, by a very 
obvious dialectical course, advances from the univer- 
sality of sin to the idea of its moral necessity. This 
admirable demonstration of his first thesis brings us 
to the heart of the Pauline anthropology. In its 
final analysis, it is based upon the ideas of sin, of the 
flesh, and of the law, which we must endeavour to 
define. 

I. r A/j,apria, adplj. Sin, and the Flesh. 

An insurmountable obstacle rises up between man 
and righteousness ; it is sin. In Paul's phraseology, 
this word not only designates a particular sinful 



2S8 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



action, but a principle immanent in human nature, 
of which individual sins are simply the external 
manifestation (Rom. vii. 8). This principle is not a 
pure abstraction, but an objective and positive power 
(8vva/jus) } governing humanity and enslaving the 
individual will. Nowhere is this objective character 
of the power of sin more strikingly exhibited than in 
Romans v. 12. Paul there depicts it as a new force 
entering into the development of the world, and con- 
stituting the whole human race sinners. He expressly 
says that it brings death upon all men, both upon 
those who, like Adam, transgressed a positive law, and 
on those who lived without it, like the generations 
between Adam and Moses. The words i<f cS Trdvre? 
7]fAaprov, which are employed to justify the univer- 
sality of death, do not indicate a subjective and active 
guilt in the individual, but an objective and passive 
state of sin. Sin having come into the world by 
the transgression of one man, entered {elar}\6ev) like 
leaven into the general life of humanity and extended 
its power to every individual (eU irdvTa? SirjXdev), 
constituting men sinners by nature, even before the 
manifestation of their individual will. This power 
takes growing possession of the world and of huma- 
nity, permeating and transforming them till they 
become instruments, or rather incarnations of sin. 

How does this development of evil accomplish 
itself and reach its climax ? We cannot answer this 
question, nor advance further, without explaining the 
relation of this power of sin to that which Paul calls 
the flesh. This is the most delicate and difficult 
point to elucidate in his whole system. 

Paul's doctrine is equally remote from the Gnostic 
dualism and from Pelagianism. 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 



The apostle expressly says that the flesh is the 
seat of sin (olfcov<ra iv ifxoi . . . tovt eauv ev rf) 
aapfcl fiovj Rom. vii. 17, 1 8 ; comp. ver. 23). Did he 
see in the flesh the essential principle of sin, and was 
his theory, after all, based on a metaphysical dualism? 
Did he on this point depart from Hebrew tradition 
and Jewish modes of thought, which excluded all 
dualism, and adopt in preference the ancient con- 
ception of heathen philosophy ? M. Holsten has 
vigorously advanced this view, and has perseveringly 
ransacked the Pauline theology for evidence of this 
pretended dualism. Hardly anywhere, to our think- 
ing, has he grasped more than a fleeting shadow. 
The relation of sin to the flesh is not purely immanent^ 
but also transcendent. It is not that the physical law 
of the flesh constitutes sin ; but on the contrary, the 
law of sin has become, and continues to be, the law of 
the flesh. From the time that it was subjugated by 
the power of evil, the flesh became weak, subjected 
to vanity and the bondage of corruption (fiaraioTrjTi, 
rrj BovXeia t/J? $9opas, chap. viii. 20, 21). In other 
words, the relation of sin to the flesh is, in Paul's view, 
identical with that which the Tlvevfia (the Divine 
Spirit) sustains to the soul of the believer. In both 
cases there is an actual immanence, but an immanence 
which presupposes an objective transcendence. This 
transcendence of the power of sin is strikingly pro- 
minent in the passage we have just analysed (Rom. 
v. 12). Sin entered the world not at the time of 
man's creation, but through the transgression [irapd- 
irr(Ofj,a) of the first Adam. So, too, in attributing to 
Christ a flesh like ours, the apostle does not mean to 
attribute sin to Him, and most jealously maintains 
His absolute purity (2 Cor. v. 21). In the third place, 

l 9 



290 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

how could he, from the dualistic point of view, speak 
of a redemption of the body, and represent this as the 
final accomplishment of salvation (Rom. viii. 23) ? 
Our salvation, in that case, would have been complete 
as soon as our souls were freed from material bonds. 1 
To escape this dualism, we need not, on the other 



1 Paul nowhere expressly speaks of the origin of evil ; perhaps 
he never even considered this metaphysical question. If his 
ideas about sin are logically worked out, we find that they 
divide and flow in two opposing currents. At first sight, there 
s the traditional theological explanation of evil as a meta- 
physical and transcendent force introduced into the world by 
the Devil-serpent (Rom. v. 12 ; comp. 2 Cor. xi. 3). This is 
the opinion which Paul received from the schools, and which 
he did not reject. But his own reflection and psychological 
analysis took another direction. According to Rom. vii. 7-21 
and 1 Cor. xv. 46 man appears at the first as psychical, — or 
carnal ; from this inferior condition the spiritual man has to 
be developed. The transition is effected by the revelation ot 
the law, which comes to disturb the unity and peace of man 
in his childish, animal condition, bringing division and inward 
conflict. Without the law, sin was dead. It came into life 
and existence through the law ; so that the latter inevitably led 
to the fall. In the first moral action, therefore, there are two 
things : the appearance of the law, which implies an advance, 
for the law is holy, just, and good ; and of transgression, which 
is a fall. But the two elements are inseparable. The latter 
theory is the only one which accords with the logical organi- 
zation of Paul's system. 

[The author resumes this question in his essay entitled 
Lorigine du peche da?is le systeme theologiqiie de Paul (Paris, 
1887). He here develops with brilliant logic the "psycho- 
logical " solution of this problem ; and boldly subordinates the 
interpretation of Rom. v. 12-14 to that of vii. 7-21, seeing in 
Paul's inner conflict a rehearsal and a mirror of that which 
took place in Adam. But this explanation ignores the factor 
of heredity ; and here, it seems to us, lies its fatal defect. Paul 
is not where Adam was ; for he is a son of Adam. ~] 



THE rAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 291 

hand, like some expositors, go the length of making 
Paul's doctrine meaningless and robbing it of origin- 
ality, by separating sin and the flesh to such an extent 
that it becomes impossible to understand why the 
apostle always associates them so closely. True, the 
word aapt; is sometimes applied to the whole man; but 
even then it does not entirely lose its original mean- 
ing ; the fundamental idea is still that of the material 
organization. The term flesli when applied to human 
nature in general, designates it in so far as it is 
governed by the laws of material existence. Hence 
the apostle speaks of the mind, will and even spirit of 
the flesh ((fypovrj/ia tt}s aapicos, Rom. viii. 6 ; 0e\r)/j.a 
-n)? aapt<:6<;, Eph. ii. 3 ; vovs tt}? crap/cos, Col. ii. 18). 
The flesh already governed by sin, in its turn gives 
the mind, the will, and the entire nature of man its 
bias towards sin. To persist in considering the sub- 
jective determination of the individual will as the 
origin of sin would prevent our having the least 
understanding of Paul's doctrine. Sin within us is 
pre-existent to the will. It has its seat in our material 
organization ; and as this organization takes the lead 
in our development, sin grows with it, and takes pos- 
session of us even before we acquire self-consciousness. 
How did our flesh become sinful ? This Paul never 
explains. He contents himself with establishing the 
fact that man's physical organization and his spiritual 
nature are in conflict, and that in this conflict the 
spirit has been vanquished and swallowed up in the 
flesh. The spirit should have glorified and spiri- 
tualized the body ; but the body has humiliated and 
materialized the spirit. The man has become carnal; 
and in this fact the triumph of sin consists. It has 
so possessed itself of the flesh, as to become incarnate 



292 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

there. Through this instrument it now reigns, and 
holds all men captive (Rom. vi. 19). Thus there is 
a radical dualism between the flesh and the spirit 
asserted in Paul's doctrine; but it does not possess 
the metaphysical character M. Holsten imputes to 
it. Though reaching beyond the moral sphere, the 
dualism established by the apostle is nevertheless 
essentially ethical ; and this gives it its tragical and 
distressing character. The spirit, which is still the 
organ of the mind, and the flesh now become the 
instrument of sin (crap^ afxapTias, aco/j>a t/)? dfiapTias, 
Rom. viii. 3 ; vi. 6), are constantly brought into col- 
lision by their conflicting desires (ravra Be d\\i'j\ois 
uvTixeiTdi, Gal. v. 17). This contest can only be 
ended by the utter annihilation of the flesh. Sin 
must be destroyed in it and with it (Rom. vi. 10; 
viii. 13 ; 1 Cor. xv. 50). 

We may now gain some idea of man's real state. 
He is no longer free; he is sold to sin (e^yo) Be crap/civo?, 
7re7rpafjLevo<; virb tt)v a/iapriav, Rom. vii. 14). Never- 
theless, he is not altogether evil ; he still makes a 
distinction in himself, the distinction between his real 
nature and the power of evil which prevails over him. 
There is in him what Paul calls the inward man 
(chap. vii. 22), which delights in the law of God. He 
continues to possess the rods, which desires and 
perceives the good. But this knowledge is only theo- 
retical, having no decisive influence on the will ; it 
is an empty form without spiritual power, wanting the 
Trvevfia which alone can give it efficacy. 1 Man thence- 

1 Setting aside the if/vxVi elsewhere included in the flesh, of 
which indeed it is the vital principle (i/ar^i/cos — o-ap/uvo?, 1 Cor. ii. 
14 ; iii. 1), we may say that the Pauline psychology distinguishes 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 29, 



forward feels himself divided between the impotent 
wish to do good and the irresistible impulses of the 
flesh. In this unhappy condition his life is protracted 
for a brief space, only to be extinguished in the end ; 
for the power of sin is essentially destructive. It has 
stirred up the flesh against the spirit, to destroy the 
spiritual life. But the flesh, in its turn, when sepa- 
rated from the spirit, finds the vital force departing 
by which it had been sustained ; it grows weak ; it 
is doomed to corruption. A struggle breaks out 
between its various inclinations ; and its life becomes 
simply a rapid progress towards death. Thus Paul 
calls the flesh when sold to sin a body of deatJi, or 
the body of this death (to acofia tov davdrov tovtov, 
Rom. vii. 24). 

Such is the development of human life towards 

in man four elements : cro>/xa, cru/)£, rot-?, irvev/xa. Two of them 
fall under the general category of substance, — (rapEj Trvcvfxa : 
the first being the substance of the body, the other the substance 
of his inner being. The two others fall under the general 
category of form : the cno/xa is the individual form of the crdp£; 
the vovs is the human form of the irvevfia. That which con- 
stitutes the weakness of man's spiritual nature is his loss of the 
substantial force of the irvev/xa. This spiritual force has been 
replaced in the vovs by that of the trap$. The vows has thus 
become a vovs crapKos, its thought a (f>povrjfJia tt}; crap/cog, and 
its will a OiXrjfxo. ttjs crapKos. Hence, in the Pauline theology, 
man's redemption is of necessity a new spiritual creation. To 
the question, Does Paul recognise the existence of 7rreu/xa in the 
natural man ? we must therefore reply in the negative. In every 
passage where he speaks of the irvevfia of the sinful man, this 
word no longer has the specific meaning that we have just 
defined, but the general sense of our word mind. Finally, 
that which Paul calls the heart (icapSta), is not the region of 
feeling alone; it is the centre where all the elements constituting 
human nature are blended into one organic whole. 



294 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

death, which the apostle constantly sets forth as 
carried on organically through the working of sin. 
But at this point a new power intervenes to accelerate 
this fatal issue and render it yet more tragic. This 
power is the law. 

2. '0 vofios. The Law. 

The law, being the perfect expression of the will of 
God, is holy, just, and good (Rom. vii. 12). The cause 
of its want of power does not lie in itself, but entirely 
in the flesh (Rom. viii. 3). The law is spiritual — man 
is carnal ; and hence a mutual and irreconcilable 
contradiction (6 vofjuos TrvevixaTiKo^ — eyob he crapiav6s y 
Rom. vii. 14). 

God did not give the law, therefore, to bring about 
the justification of sinners. In order to be saved, 
man must be restored to life ; but it is not within the 
power of a law to give him life (el yap ehoOri vo/jlos 
6 hvvdfievos ^cooiroi^crai,, oVtw? ifc vofiov av rjv 7) 
hifcaioavvri, Gal. iii. 21). The law shows man what 
righteousness is, but does not impart it to him : it is 
unattainable by the flesh. For it was promulgated 
not to effect righteousness, but to realize and multiply 
sin (Rom. v. 20 ; vii. 7-1 1 ; Gal. iii. 19). 

In truth, sin, before it can be pardoned and de- 
stroyed, must realize all its potentialities and attain 
its complete development. The very function of the 
law is to bring sin to this full maturity. The law, 
in this sense, is actually the power of sin (?} hvvajMs 
tt}? dfjiapria? 6 vo/jlo^, i Cor. xv. 56). It is that which 
gives to it subjective reality, — which, in short, makes 
sin sinful. It pushes sin onward from its virtual 
condition to that of positive transgression (Rom. vii. 
8,9; iv. 15). 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 295 



With no less penetration than vigour, Paul de- 
scribes this inevitable development of sin under the 
irresistible impulse of the law. We do not know sin 
except by the law (tt/v dfiapriav ov/c eyvcov, el fMT) Bid 
vofiov, Rom. vii. 7). Setting itself up before me as 
the sovereign rule of my actions, the law at the same 
time makes me conscious of their moral imperfection. 
It is the law, for instance, which reveals to me the sin 
of covetousness by saying to me : Thou shalt not 
covet, (jdui vofiov eTTLyvcoons dfiapriav, Rom. iii. 20.) 
It does still more. Previously to the coming of the 
law, sin indeed was within me ; but I had not the 
slightest consciousness of it ; it was there as a latent, 
unawakened force, — as Paul puts it, it was dead 
{dfiapria veKpd, chap. vii. 8). The law awakens and 
re-animates it. Without law, there is no transgres- 
sion. More than this, not only does transgression 
become possible under the commandment ; but the 
prohibition inevitably gives birth in me to the desire 
for the thing forbidden (Rom. vii. 11). Nitimur in 
vetitum semper. Thus sin becomes transgression, and 
brings itself under the curse. The law passes the 
sentence of death against me ; instead of giving me 
life, it slays me. Such is the revolution inevitably 
effected by it in my nature. Formerly, without the 
law, I was alive. My life flourished unimpeded ; 
nothing disturbed its unity. Now the law has come ; 
sin has revived in me ; and I myself am dead ! 

The consciousness of sin, the realization of sin 
through transgression, the sentence of death passed 
upon the sinner, — these are the three stages of the 
development of evil brought about by the law. But 
this penalty of death, the wages of sin, is not only 
passed by the law against the sinner from without, in 



296 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

the form of a judicial sentence ; it is also realized 
within, exciting in human nature that unhappy con- 
flict between the law of the members and the law of 
the understanding, in which the life of the individual 
is consumed. The apostle, at the close of the seventh 
chapter of Romans, sets before us this inward struggle 
and progress towards dissolution, which inevitably 
terminates in death. The holier the law and the 
more clearly it shows me what I ought to be, so 
much the more does it overwhelm me with the sense 
of what I am. The spiritual height of the command 
only helps me the better to measure the depth of 
my corruption. Between what I desire and what I 
can do, between my understanding which apprehends 
the good, and my flesh which realizes the evil, 
between my aspirations and my tendencies, there is 
an ever-widening contrast. It seems as though I 
were only engaged in my own destruction, desiring 
good but practising evil, and condemning myself for 
doing so. It is an intestine war, in which my under- 
standing attacks and scorns my flesh, and my flesh 
revenges itself by crushing the vain desires of my 
understanding. I no longer know what I am about ; 
for I fail to do what I would, and I do just that 
which I hate. In vain do I strive to put an end to the 
conflict ; in vain do I redouble my efforts to observe 
the law and overcome the flesh. In this struggle, 
in which I am my own adversary, I am invariably 
defeated. I shall never escape from it, till I am dead. 
My life cannot last in this agony ; I sink in that 
despair which is the beginning and the foretaste of 
death ! 

Paul brings the demonstration of his first thesis 
to a close with an energy that is truly terrible. Not 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 297 

only does man fail to obtain justification by means 
of the law, but it logically conducts him to a dia- 
metrically opposite result. The law is holy and 
spiritual, it is true ; but as man can only fulfil it by 
means of the flesh, it comes to pass that the works 
of the law (epya vofiov) are, in reality, mere works 
of the flesh (epya crap/cos). It is useless to multiply 
these external works ; he only multiplies the causes 
of his condemnation and aggravates his guilt. We 
see that the abyss is really bottomless ; and every 
effort which the man makes to extricate himself, only 
plunges him further in its depths. But at the very 
point where he despairs of himself, the grace of God 
takes hold of him and saves him. 

II. Max Justified by Faith in Christ. 

This development of the power of sin, under the 
impetus given by the law, is met in the apostle's 
doctrine by a corresponding development of holiness, 
the essential principle of which is God's righteousness ; 
its means, faith in Jesus Christ — its end, life. 

What Paul intended by his use of the expression 
olkcuoo-vvt] Qeov has not always been fully appre- 
hended. This genitive case has often been con- 
sidered equivalent to iva-mov Qeov, and has been 
translated the righteousness that avails before God 
(Rom. iii. 20). Righteousness, it is said, was the end 
in view ; and Paul only wished to ascertain whether 
it could be obtained by the law or by faith. On that 
view, the passage would express a general notion, 
resolved into two subordinate ideas — negative and 
positive respectively ; and the Pauline theory might 
be interpreted thus : 



295 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



7) Bi/caioavvr} rod Seov. 



7) etc vofjiov huccaoavvr). ii etc Trlareco^ SiKacoavvT]. 1 
There is, however, a grave error here, which touches 
the very essence of the apostle's doctrine, and mis- 
represents it from the outset. In every passage where 
this expression recurs, the BifcaiocrvvT] Qeov is directly 
opposed to justification by the law, as an absolutely 
contrary idea ; it is represented as being itself the 
source of justification by faith (Rom. i. iy ; iii. 2i). 
If the righteousness obtained by faith is in opposi- 
tion to justification by the fulfilment of the law, the 
BiKaioavvrj ©eou must be opposed to the IBla Bacaio- 
avvri (Rom. x. 3). Instead of the foregoing triad, 
we have a double antithesis : 

7) ihia SiKatoavvr] — 77 hucaioovvr) rod Oeov : 

7] i/C VO/JLOV hlKCLLOGVVri 1) €K TTlCTTecOS hucaioavvrj. 

The ScKaioauvT] Oeov is the righteousness of which 
God is the Author, and which He gives freely, in con- 
trast to the righteousness which man seeks by his own 
efforts (ISia Bi/caioavvr]). This righteousness exists 
already in God as an attribute and active force ; it is 
transferred to man, and realized in him by the action 
of Divine grace (Bifcaiov/jLevoi, Bwpeav ttj avrov ^dptri, 
Rom. iii. 24). Paul himself has explained his doc- 
trine very fully in Romans iii. 25, 26. In this latter 
passage the words irpos ttjv evSeifjiv rrjs Sifcaioavvrjs 
avrov are fully defined by those that follow : eh to 
elvai auTOv hitccuov, teal Stfcaiovvra tov lie 7rt<TT€G)S. 
Thus Bi/caioavvrj ©eov= (9eo? Si/caios kclI Bikclio)V. The 
idea is that of a positive righteousness immanent in 



1 Sec Baur, Paulits, vol. ii., p. 147 [Eng. trans., ii., 136]. He 
seems to have abandoned this view in his Neutestamentliche 
Tkcologie ( 1 864), p. 1 34. 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 299 



God, and manifesting itself outwardly in the sinner's 
justification. This conception is surprising to us, 
accustomed as we are, by our very use of language, 
to give the word righteousness a merely negative 
meaning. We are so thoroughly prepossessed with 
this judicial and inferior notion, that it is difficult 
for us to rise to this far higher and finer idea of a 
righteousness which is imparted, and which tends 
everywhere to substitute good for evil and life for 
death. No contradiction must be asserted, therefore, 
between the righteousness of God, in the apostle's 
sense of this word, and the Grace of God. While the 
word x ci P L<i indicates the act of love by which God 
saves man, the phrase hiKcuoavvi] Qeov simply defines 
the nature and moral quality of this Divine act. 

The hiKCLLoavvr] Qeov, thus understood, is more 
than a simple acquittal of the guilty ; it is an actual 
power (hvvafjus Qeov), which enters into the world and 
is organically developed there, — like the power of sin, 
but in opposition to it. W T e have observed how the 
latter passed from its virtual (dfiapria) to its actual 
state, and became realized in transgression (irapd- 
/3acrt<>), thus arriving at its final condition of irapd- 
TnwfjLCL. The righteousness of God follows a dialectical 
course exactly parallel to this. The Slkclloctvvt) Qeov, 
itself a transcendent principle, finds expression in 
the hucaiwcris, the act of justification ; and reaches its 
end in the hiKaicofia, which is righteousness realized. 
The first process results of necessity in death ; the 
latter, with equal necessity, results in life. In each 
case there is a similar logical processus, accomplished 
both in the individual life and in history. 

We can at once perceive how far removed was 
Paul's real belief from the theory of forensic justi- 



>oo THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



fication elaborated by the scholasticism of the Middle 
Ages. According to this theory, the act of justification 
is a mere verdict of nonsuit {prdonnance de non-lien) 
on the part of God, — a sentence alike inadequate and 
arbitrary. The whole case is reduced to that of an 
old debt paid to God by Jesus. On this assumption 
there ceases to be any organic connexion between 
justification and regeneration ; at the most, there 
remains, as a mere external bond, the sentiment of 
gratitude due from the man who is set free to his 
liberator. Not only is the nerve of the apostle's 
reasoning thus destroyed, but we cannot, on this con- 
ception of the matter, even prove sufficiently the duty 
of gratitude. 

Is it not obvious, indeed, that to insist on the 
necessity of this one duty is to return in the end, by 
a circuitous route, to the very principle to be avoided, 
viz. that of justification by works ; and that this 
theory leaves us with an irreducible dualism set up 
in our soteriology ? 

Paul would not have found words severe enough 
to stigmatize such a flagrant misinterpretation of his 
doctrine. True, he has said that God in His mercy 
declares justification and deliverance for the sinner ; 
but he does not know — and had he known, would 
never have admitted — that subtle distinction between 
declaring right eons and making righteous, justiim 
dicere and jnstnm facere, which has been the object 
of so much dispute. To him, the word of God is 
always creative and full of power ; it always produces 
an actual effect. In declaring a man justified, there- 
fore, it actually and directly creates within him a new 
beginning of righteousness. The Sifcaioa-vvr) Oeov 
from that moment enters as an active force into the 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 301 



heart and life of the believer, and there becomes the 
fruitful source of a permanent sanctification. Re- 
generation is simply the consequence of justification ; 
and works are but the outcome of faith. 

Such is the profound unity and organic sequence 
of the Pauline doctrine. We shall now endeavour to 
reproduce it by indicating its essential features. 

3. O \dyo? rod (TTavpov. The Cross. 

In the death of Jesus the righteousness of God in 
its active force was historically realized and revealed 
to all men QirecfxivipcoTai). It there appears as a 
positive act of justification (Si/caicoo-is), seeking to 
realize itself finally through faith in the soul of the 
believer, where it becomes an actual state of righteous- 
ness (Si/ccLLoo/Mi, Rom. iii. 24 ; iv. 25 ; viii. 4). 

Thus the death of Jesus comes to be the centre of 
the whole Pauline system. The apostle's Chris- 
tianity is summed up in the Person of Christ ; but 
this Person itself only acquires its proper redemptive 
significance when He dies on the cross. Hence we 
can quite understand the apostle's declaration that he 
wishes to know nothing but Christ and Christ cruci- 
fied (1 Cor. ii. 2). With the death of Jesus, however, 
is necessarily associated the fact of His resurrection. 
Not only are these two logically connected in Paul's 
doctrine, but we might even consider them as one 
and the same act, since they set forth the two suc- 
cessive and essential stages of justification. With 
the first Paul connects the entire negative aspect of 
redemption — deliverance from guilt, and the de- 
struction of the power of sin ; to the second he 
refers its whole positive aspect — justification, and the 
creation of spiritual life (Rom, iv. 25 ; vi. 1-11). 



302 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



The ecclesiastical theory of expiation, so far from 
interpreting the apostle's doctrine aright, amounts to 
its formal contradiction. 1 The idea of an external 
satisfaction, given to God in order to wrest the pardon 
of sinners from Him, is foreign to all the epistles. 
Paul nowhere says that God needed to be appeased. 
He starts from the contrary point of view. The 
pardon of sin is ever the spontaneous act of God's 
love. It is His sovereign and absolute grace which 
took, and still maintains the initiative in the work of 
redemption. The sacrifice of Christ, so far from being 
the cause of this love, is its effect. It was not accom- 
plished outside the sphere of grace — outside, as one 
might say, of God Himself — in order to influence 
the Divine will ; but God Himself ivas in Christy re- 
conciling the world to Himself by Him (2 Cor. v. 19). 

As Paul does not admit the traditional dualism in 
God between love and righteousness, so neither does 
he make any separation between the forgiveness of 
sins and the destruction of sin itself. The idea of an 
external expiation was not enough for him. The 
standard passages upon which it has been founded 
(Rom. iii. 25 ; Gal. iii. 13) are far from giving us his 
whole teaching on the subject ; nor have they in the 
Pauline theory the capital importance attributed to 
them by scholastic theology. If we have any regard 
for the logical unity of the Pauline doctrine, we must 

[ l M. Sabatier is scarcely fair to the " ecclesiastical theory," 
which originated in a profound, though possibly one-sided, sense 
of the guilt of sin and the auger which it has provoked in the 
holy nature of God. On his side, such texts as Rom. i. 18 (in 
connexion with vers. 16, 17); v. 10; Gal. iii. 13, demand further 
elucidation. See Dorner's System of Christian Doctrine, vol. 
iii., pp. 120-132 ; iv., 99-107, 201.] 



THE PAULINE ANTHROPOLOGY. 303 



expound these texts in harmony with Romans vi. 
1 — 1 1 ; viii. 3 ; and 2 Corinthians v. 21. Only by the 
aid of these latter passages can we gain an adequate 
view of the apostle's entire doctrine of Redemption. 
Now, these texts make the practical effect of the 
death of Jesus to consist not in the satisfaction which 
it rendered to God, but in the destruction of sin that 
it accomplished. 

The more foreign is the idea of satisfaction to 
Pauline soteriology, the more essential, on the con- 
trary, seems to be that of substitution (2 Cor. v. 14-16). 
The apostle's whole theory rests, in its final analysis, 
upon a mystical identification of Jesus with believers : 
Jesus becomes all that we were ; and we, on our part, 
become all that Christ was. He is sin in us ; we are 
righteousness in Him (rbv (irj yvovra ctfiapriav . . . 
dfiaprtau eirol^aev, Xva rjfieis ^/evco/u.eOa EifcaiocrvvT] 
Qeov ev aura), 2 Cor. v. 21). He made Himself poor 
with all our poverty, in order to enrich us with His 
whole wealth (2 Cor. viii. 9). Jesus, it seems, could 
not save humanity while apart from it. To realize in 
it the righteousness of God and begin for it a new 
organic development, He must of necessity appear 
within it as one of its members. Thus the entire 
burden of the work of redemption rests upon Christ's 
humanity, — not, as in Anselm's theory, upon His 
Divinity (81 avOpvirov, rov ero? avQp^irov 'I-qaov 
Xpiarov, 1 Cor. xv. 21 ; comp. xv. 45, and Rom. v. 15). 
Not only must the Redeemer belong to humanity, 
but He must subject Himself to all the powers which 
control it, to the objective power of sin, of the law 
and of death, that He may really vanquish them. 
In other words, summing up in Himself all humanity, 
He must allow the fatal issue of the life of sin already 



3<>4 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

described to reproduce itself, — and as it were, to 
spend itself upon His person. 

So it was with Jesus. When the time was fulfilled 
the Son of God appeared in the world as a mere man. 
He was born of a woman, and lived under the law 
(Gal. iv. 4) ; He died to redeem us from sin, to free 
us from the law and rescue us from death. Sin is 
destroyed in the death of Jesus, not only because it 
is openly condemned and actually punished, but also 
because it has at last produced its worst result. In 
attaining its full development, it exhausts and destroys 
itself. A new development may then begin. Thus 
Jesus only properly expiates sin by bringing it to its 
issue. His death is the consummation of the first 
period of the life of humanity ; it terminates the life 
of the flesh. 

We must note, further, the precise link by which 
this wonderful theory of redemption is connected with 
that which Paul has said concerning the flesh in its 
relation to sin. The power of evil which it was 
Christ's mission to destroy had taken possession of 
the flesh and even, as we said, become incarnate 
there. Sin, therefore, could not be absolutely con- 
quered except by the destruction of the flesh. Hence 
that theological axiom on which the whole theory 
of the apostle rests : He that is dead is freed from 
sin (6 <yap airoOavcov hehLKaicoiai airo ttjs a/jLaprla<; ) 
Rom. vi. 7). Paul makes strict application of this 
axiom to the death of Jesus. He brings the Re- 
deemer as near to sinful and carnal humanity as it 
is possible to do, without compromising His holiness. 
Such is the imperative logic of his doctrine, that he 
does not shrink from that most startling expression, 
" God made Him to be sin, who knew no sin." At 



THE PAULIXE ANTHROPOLOGY. 305 



last, in Romans viii. 3, he plainly says : " God sent 
His Son in flesh entirely resembling our sinful flesh, 
and thus condemned sin in the flesh." The flesh of 
Christ, no less than all the rest of His Person, has 
therefore a representative value ; it represents, in very 
deed, the sinful flesh of humanity, the organ and 
seat of sin. In the death of Christ sin is condemned, 
the flesh is crucified and destroyed, and redemption 
is objectively accomplished. 

4. ( H 7t[(ttl?. Faith. 

By love Christ accomplishes His identification with 
humanity ; by faith man attains his identification 
with Christ. Through it we so thoroughly participate 
with Jesus and become so entirely one with Him, that 
His death becomes our death, and His resurrection 
our own resurrection. With Him we die to sin, to the 
law and the flesh ; with Him we triumph over death, 
and are born again to new life (Rom. vi. 1-11). Faith 
carries on and repeats in each individual life the 
decisive crisis, the revolution that the death of Jesus 
wrought in history. It is the destruction of sin within 
us, the inward creation of the Divine life. The justi- 
fication and regeneration of the individual are only the 
continuation of the original redemption, which was 
accomplished in the Head of humanity and is realized 
in turn by each of its members. Faith does not save 
us by its own virtue ; in itself it is a mere vain and 
empty form ; but we are saved by its Divine object — 
by the hiKaiovvvT) &eov realized in Jesus Christ, which 
becomes thenceforward am immanent, living principle 
in us. Through faith we are not only pardoned 
and set free ; we are at the same time regenerated, 
enfranchised, and, in a word, restored to life. 

20 



3o6 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

5. JJ &)}. Life. 

Life is the natural fruit of righteousness, just as 
death was the consequence and wages of sin (Rom. 
vi. 22, 23). Though the flesh, which has the principle 
of sin still within it, is doomed to death, the believer 
possesses in Christ's own Spirit (irvevfia ^wottoiovv) a 
principle of immortal life, which permeates, raises, and 
transforms his entire nature. Formerly there was 
conflict in the carnal man, a conflict ending in the 
growing triumph of sin, a<nd in death ; there is still a 
struggle in the regenerate man between the old prin- 
ciple which is dying out, and the new which is gaining 
strength ; but this struggle now results in a victory of 
life over death, more and more perfect and glorious. 
All that is mortal within us will in the end be ab- 
sorbed in life. Righteousness will restore everything 
that sin had destroyed. 

Through faith the Christian possesses by antici- 
pation all the riches of this new life. He really 
"lives by his faith." His inner life is one of perfect 
liberty. He is not without law ; for Christ has be- 
come law immanent in him (eWoyLtc? Xpiarov, 1 Cor. 
ix. 21). But this law is simply a principle of love, 
enabling him to fulfil the will of God with joyous 
ease. The life of love is nothing but the outcome of 
faith (Gal. v. 6). Thus Paul's great doctrine, having 
been perfectly established in the realm of theory, wins 
a yet more splendid triumph in the sphere of practical 
life. No wonder that for the past eighteen centuries 
it has inspired the great thinkers of Christianity in 
the world of intellect, and in the moral world created 
its great heroes. 



CHAPTER III 

THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE IN THE SPHERE OF 
SOCIETY AND HISTORY. 

The Religious Philosophy of History. 

I. The Person of Christ, the Vital 
Principle of the Church. 

ITITHERTO the Christian principle has been 
1 confined within the sphere of the individual 
life. But it tends by its very nature towards a uni- 
versal realization. All that Christ is for one member 
of humanity, He is and must become for all ; and the 
result of this new development of the Christian prin- 
ciple is the Church. The unity of the Church rests 
upon the sense, common to all its members, of a 
living communion with Christ. 

To set forth this essential unity of the Church, 
Paul several times compares it to the organization 
of the human body (i Cor. xii. 12, ff. ; Rom. xii. 4) : 
" As in one body we have many members, which have 
not all the same office, so we are all one body in 
Christ ; and we are towards each other what the 
members of one body are among themselves." This 
body is called acbfia Xpcarov (1 Cor. xii. 27) — that is, 
a body having the principle of its being and the basis 

of its life in Christ. Christ is not only its Head, but 

307 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



its very soul ; He manifests in and through it all 
His hidden virtues (Eph. iv. 16 ; Col. ii. 19). Thus 
regarded, the Church becomes the body of Christ (to 
crcbfia 70i) Xpcarov) ; it serves as the external and 
visible manifestation, the material realization of all 
that Christ Himself is invisibly. Into this body 
Christ pours His plenitude of life, so that the Church, 
filled with the virtues of its Head, becomes in turn 
the TrXrjpwfxa rod Xpiarov (Eph. i. 23). 

The Church can only realize the full virtue of its 
vital principle through a laborious process of evolution. 
But all development implies variety ; and hence the 
apostle perceives and , acknowledges in the Church 
diverse offices, gifts, and ministries (SiaipeaeLs yapia- 
fidrcov elaiv, I Cor. xii. 4). To each of these separate 
gifts he allows free and full development ; and through 
them the wealth of life in the Church is manifested. 
But on the other hand, these different cliarisms pro- 
ceed from one and the same Spirit (ivepjel to ev teal 
to avrb TIvev/JLa) ; and with love as their common 
inspiration, all tend to the same goal, the perfecting 
of the whole body of the Church. So the unity of 
the Church is, in the first instance, broken up and 
expanded into a rich variety ; but this, in its turn, is 
absorbed into the supreme unity. Such is the organic 
and harmonious development of the life of the Church. 

From this conception of the Church is derived the 
Pauline idea of baptism, and of the Lord's supper, 
which centres in that of the substantial union of 
the Christian with Christ. Baptism, the symbol of 
faith, obtains its significance from faith itself ; it be- 
comes the symbol of our death and resurrection with 
Christ. In baptism we are buried with Jesus in His 
death, and rise again with Him that we may walk in 



THE PAULINE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY. 309 



newness of life (Rom. vi. 3, 4). In like manner, the 
Lord's supper expresses the mystical union of the 
members of the Church with Christ and with one 
another; they are one loaf, one body (1 Cor. x. 1 7 ). 
By its means they appropriate and assimilate the life 
of Christ, the substance of His spiritual being. So the 
Church grows both without and within, both in extent 
and in spiritual power ; for it is not only the creation 
of the Spirit of Christ, but, if we may so speak, His 
enlarged existence and continued life. 

II. The Old Covenant and the New. 

H iirayyeXia, 6 vo/xos, f) ttigtis. 

The strong antithesis between the law and faith 
established in the preceding chapter, tends to find 
its solution, so soon as Paul examines it from the 
historical standpoint. The apostle, indeed, could not 
assume an entirely negative position towards Judaism. 
Not only did he believe in the revelation of God in 
the Old Testament, but he further admitted the 
Divine origin of the law itself. It was therefore in- 
evitable that he should formulate the relationship of 
the Old and New Covenant in their positive aspect. 

Judaism, so regarded, was at once reduced from 
its position as the supreme religion to that of a pre- 
paratory revelation. The old covenant between God 
and His people was indeed a reality ; but not being 
an end in itself, it could not be final (2 Cor. iii. 7, 11). 
It came in as an essential but transitional stage in 
the progress of the Divine plan, designed to prepare 
for that final manifestation of the righteousness of 
God in Christ to which it bears witness (Rom. iii. 21). 

This preparation has its positive side in the pri- 



3 to THE APOSTLE PAUL, 

mordial gift of the promise, while it has another, 
essentially negative, in the intervention and operation 
of the law. Between faith and the promise there 
exists, indeed, a full resemblance and identity ; for 
they have the same object, viz., the grace of God. 
The promise is the anticipation of faith ; and faith is 
the realization of the promise. Hence Paul's strong 
assertion that no other justification was at any time 
possible to man before God, except justification by 
faith, — that this was the primary and original idea 
of Divine revelation, distinctly antecedent to the 
institution of the law itself. This idea he readily 
discovers contained in the promise made to the 
patriarch. Abraham believed in God ; and this faith 
was imputed to him for righteousness. The begin- 
ning of salvation by faith may therefore be traced 
back to him (Gal. iii. 7). It was to faith alone, and 
to faith without circumcision, that the promise was 
made (Rom. iv. 10). Hence the capital importance 
that belongs to the person of Abraham, according 
to Paul's view, in the order of Divine revelation. 
Abraham's experience marks the point where the 
promise enters into history — the juncture at which 
the justifying grace of God was for the first time 
declared to the world. So the name of the patriarch 
stands at the head of one of the great epochs of 
religious history. This promise is a veritable testa- 
ment, which from the first has secured the right of 
believers to the paternal inheritance, — a testament 
that no subsequent event could either modify or set 
aside (Gal. iii. 15). 

While the promise and faith are thus identical in 
their origin, the law on the contrary represents an 
external element, radically different from both. It 



THE PAULINE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY. 311 



intervenes between the two, in order to bring about 
the fulfilment of the promise ; but it has no direct 
connexion with it. Its ministry represents a great 
parenthesis in history {irapeiai}\6ev). Coming 430 
years afterwards, it is not the continuation of the 
promise ; for in that case we should have to admit 
that God had modified His first intention. But the 
word of God cannot be annulled. The law, therefore, 
has an object quite distinct from the promise. Its 
mission solely consists in realizing and multiplying 
sin (Gal. iii. 19 ; Rom v. 20) ; and to this end it inter- 
vened between the promise and its fulfilment, and 
served as a middle term and mediator, linking together 
these two stages of history. In what did this tem- 
porary mediation consist? In the fact that it placed 
all men under sin and the curse, keeping them under 
this double yoke until the coming of Christ. The 
realization of grace, in fact, could not have taken 
place before sin had been realized ; and it was in ac- 
complishing this end that the law worked effectually 
to prepare for the advent of grace. Such was its 
office, — that of a pedagogue, and temporary mediator. 
Though justification does not come through the 
law, and although the law produces a wholly opposite 
result, still, it is not contrary either to the promise or 
to faith ; it has, to be sure, its place and part in the 
Divine plan ; it represents a stage of condemnation 
interposed between promise and faith, through which 
man has to pass before he attains the full conscious- 
ness of his reconciliation with God. Thus, at the 
close of the discussion, the apostle's doctrine recovers 
its unity of thought, for a time impaired ; and the role 
of the Law is defined, alike in its essential difference 
from the Gospel, and in its historical relation to it. 



THE APOSTLE TAUL. 



The promise, the /aw, faith — Abraham, Moses, Christ 
— indicate the three successive stages in the Divine 
plan, as they are logically connected and logically 
necessary to each other. 

This view differs fundamentally from the mode in 
which the Jews and Jewish Christians persisted in 
regarding the Old Testament. It is, indeed, so bold 
and original, that the Christian theology of following 
centuries could neither understand nor reproduce it. 
It preserves the letter of the old covenant, but in- 
terprets it by the spirit of the new. Paul was fully 
aware that the Jew could not of himself attain 
this spiritual standpoint. " A veil remains," he says, 
"upon the old covenant. It can be lifted by Christ 
alone. But to this day the Jews read Moses without 
understanding him." They did not perceive the sub- 
ordinate character and the ephemeral glory of Moses' 
ministry. It was not without glory, for it was a 
manifestation of the will of God ; but its glory was 
fleeting, because the ministry itself was not to be 
permanent. It fades and disappears before a glory 
that is surpassing and imperishable (2 Cor. iii. 6-15). 

III. Adam and Christ; or the Two Ages 
of Humanity. 

Paul's doctrine hitherto had not gone beyond the 
sacred limits of the Old Testament ; but it evidently 
tended to embrace within its scope the whole historical 
development of humanity, completed and crowned by 
the Gospel of Christ. 

The apostle delights to compare the life of the human 
race, as a whole, to the natural course of the individual 
life, and to trace in the first the various phases be- 



THE PAULINE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY. 313 



longing to the second. Humanity itself begins with 
childhood, and is obliged to pass through a slow and 
painful period of education and minority. It is 
certainly an heir, but an heir under age, who has to 
remain in ward until the time of his full majority. 
The promise corresponds to the paternal testament ; 
the guardian, severe and inflexible, is the law which 
fulfils its office until the time appointed by the father 
himself. The heir until then is treated as a slave. It 
is in Christ that man finally gains his rights of sonship, 
and attains his full majority (irXrjpwfMa tov %povov). 
At this point, the period of childhood and youth 
spent in subjection ends ; and the second phase in 
human life begins, that of mature age, characterized 
by liberty and the right of self-control (Gal. iv. 1-7). 

All the ideas, and all the Jewish and heathen insti- 
tutions which had governed humanity before the 
coming of Christ, come under this general designa- 
tion: aaOevrj ical iriwya Gjoiyela — tilings rudimentary, 
primitive elements, by whose means the human race 
was formerly educated, but which are no longer suited 
to Christian humanity in its freedom and maturity 
(Gal. iv. 9). By this bold conception Paul has ranged 
Jewish and heathen traditions alike under the same 
category ; and in some sort has blended them, by 
subordinating them both to the Gospel. 

This lofty philosophy of history is still better ex- 
pressed in the parallel between the two Adams, in 
which it reaches its climax (Rom. v. 12-21 ; 1 Cor. 
xv. 45-49). The importance of these two passages is 
not, in my judgment, fully apprehended by those who 
see in them a mere typological figure, a figure more 
remarkable perhaps than others, but still serving only 
to illustrate the apostle's discourse. Placed in the 



314 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



logical connexion in which we find it, this parallel is 
of capital importance in Paul's system, and expresses 
one of his finest ideas. 

Adam and Christ represent the two great periods 
in the life of humanity. The flesh and sin, the law 
and death, reign over the first ; the Spirit and faith, 
righteousness and life, are the powers that prevail in 
the second. The first Adam was earthly and carnal 
(xoiicbs an d yjrv^iKo^). All his descendants have been 
earthly and carnal, have lived his life and borne his 
image. With Adam's transgression, sin entered into 
the world ; it has reigned over all the children of Adam, 
giving them over to death, the inevitable wages of sin. 
Such is the natural development of this period. Its 
organic bond of connexion with the second epoch, 
which is summed up in Christ, has not always been 
fully apprehended. This new period does not inter- 
vene abruptly, as though it were obtruded by an arbi- 
trary act ; it originates in the first, and is evolved from 
it. The carnal and psychic life has to precede the 
pneumatic life, giving scope for its due development 
(i Cor. xv. 46). The second period does not begin, 
as it has been supposed, with the supernatural birth 
of Jesus ; it may even be asked whether in Paul's 
theory there is any place for this supernatural birth. 1 

[ l Paul ascribes to Christ a unique Divine sonship and un- 
tainted holiness : at the same time, he asserts the heredity of 
sin, and the solidarity in transgression of the descendants of 
Adam. This flagrant contradiction does not in the least em- 
barrass him. How could his logical mind have held together 
these contrary beliefs, unless there lay behind them a knowledge 
of the exceptional character of the birth of Jesus ? That there 
was reserve upon this subject in the first generation was natural, 
especially while the virgin mother lived, " keeping all these things 
in her heart." See Weiss's Life of Christ vol. i., pp. 222-233.] 



THE PAULINE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY 



The position that this fact occupies in ecclesiastical 
theology, is filled in the apostle's system by that of 
the resurrection. The new epoch of history begins 
with the Saviour's resurrection, which was the first 
manifestation of the spiritual life on earth. The 
historical life of Jesus belongs, in reality, to the first 
period. Christ Himself was also a descendant of 
Adam, — born of a woman, coming under the law, with 
a flesh like ours, living in the realm of sin and death, 
so that under the same conditions He might develop 
and display the Divine life which animated Him. 

From this point of view, everything turns upon the 
fact of Christ's actual humanity. The second Adam 
is from heaven, it is true ; but He also comes forth 
from the bosom of humanity. He enters the human 
race as a living member thereof, and becomes for it 
the father of a new humanity. The Spirit, righteous- 
ness, and life are in Him not merely qualities, but 
powers, entering into history and unfolding there 
like the sin transmitted by descent from Adam. 
In fact, precisely as we by our origin are in com- 
munion with Adam's sin and participate in his death, 
so those who enter into communion with Christ are 
partakers of His life and righteousness. If there is 
a difference, it is entirely to the advantage of the 
second Adam : a single sin was the source of condem- 
nation for the many ; redemption, on the contrary, 
starts with the multitude of actual sins over which 
Christ triumphs, and in the midst of which He makes 
manifest, through His obedience, both righteousness 
and life (Rom. v. 15-17). 

Christianity, though supernatural in its Divine 
cause, does not make any abrupt or violent entrance 
into history, so as to interrupt its course. It manifests 



316 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



itself in due time, issuing from the very midst of 
humanity, where God at the appointed hour causes the 
new life to appear. The idea of a fall of the human 
race as understood by Augustine, has no logical exis- 
tence in Paul's system. Or, at any rate, if the apostle 
does admit a failure, a fall of the human race into sin, 
the idea is finally absorbed in the loftier one of constant 
progress. The second Adam not only repairs the 
fault of the first ; He brings about actual progress, 
and marks out a higher order of life. The resurrec- 
tion of Christ completes the creation of humanity. 

IV. ESCHATOLOGY. 

The struggles of history are summed up, according 
to Paul, in the constant antagonism of two opposing 
principles, death and life. This great drama is to 
have its denouement. The power of death is virtually 
already broken by the resurrection of Jesus Christ ; 
with this first triumph the Pauline eschatology begins. 
This doctrine signifies nothing else than the unfolding 
or progressive realization of all the individual, social, 
and cosmical consequences existing in germ in this 
fundamental fact. By no means does the apostle 
limit to humanity that radical transformation an- 
nounced and commenced in the personal triumph of 
Jesus. It will extend to every celestial sphere, and 
throughout physical nature. The resurrection of 
Christ is a crisis in the development of universal life 
(Rom. viii. 18-24). 

How will this transformation be effected ? For 
the external mechanism of Jewish eschatology the 
apostle, as we have seen, endeavoured to substitute 
a moral force. It would, however, be a misconception 



THE PAULINE PHILOSOPHY OF HLSTOR\. 317 



of his doctrine to attribute to him the modern notion 
of the unlimited progress of history. He most cer- 
tainly pictured the end as a dramatic finale, brought 
about by God at the moment foreseen in His designs. 
Though he may have relinquished the hope of being 
present in his life-time at the parousia of the Lord, 
he always expected this great event, and wished those 
who came after him to expect it (1 Cor. xv. 22 ; Phil, 
i. 10 ; iii. 20). There is no contradiction, though it 
has been asserted, between this ultimate expectation 
and the hope that Paul cherished of being united 
by death immediately to Christ and God (Phil. i. 21 ; 
2 Cor. v. 8). Until the time of the external and 
historical manifestation of the Lord, all Christians, 
whether living or dead, have their glory and their 
life hidden in God, as the glory of Christ Himself is 
now hidden from the eyes of the world (Col. iii. 1-4). 
The time of the Parousia will be that of the resur- 
rection. Then the principle of the new life which is 
in Christ will reveal its full power, in raising up 
our mortal bodies and thus completing the work of 
redemption (Rom. viii. 23). On the other side, Paul 
is equally decided in excluding flesh and blood from 
this glorious resurrection (1 Cor. xv. 50). Evidently, 
on his principles, the flesh, the seat and organ of sin, 
must be destroyed. An essential distinction, there- 
fore, must be made between the body and the flesh. 
The flesh is the material substance of the body. The 
body is the essential form of the human being. From 
the philosophical point of view, it may be asked how 
the form can subsist when the substance which filled 
it has disappeared ? Paul did not concern himself 
with this question. He strove to make his own 
meaning clear ; and in this he has succeeded admirably, 



3i 8 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

by his comparison of the resurrection to the germina- 
tion of a grain of corn. The new plant is not com- 
posed of the same matter ; and yet the type remains, 
despite the change of substance. The new body 
develops organically from the germ which gives it 
birth. There is therefore a real connexion between 
the body which is sown in corruption, and the body 
which is raised in incorruption. It is the same, and 
yet a new body. The body, in fact, represents to 
Paul a Divine idea essential and necessary to the full 
development of the individual life ; it is even the 
cause or principle of our individuality. This Divine 
type is successively realized in elements of a diverse 
character (aWrj vdp%) ; like the soul itself, it rises 
by the crisis of death to a higher state of life. It 
becomes a spiritual body, inasmuch as the iruevfia 
will hereafter animate it, as the ^jrv^V does at 
present. 

This resurrection will be the time of the Lord's full 
triumph. All power and authority will yield to Him. 
His enemies will fall beneath His feet (i Cor. xv. 
24-28). Must this final victory be regarded as an 
external triumph ? Is it a question of the enforced 
submission of hostile powers, or of their transforma- 
tion, conversion, and glorification ? To some, perhaps, 
the first conception may seem the more probable ; yet 
when Paul declares that death itself shall be abolished 
for ever, it seems to imply that evil will actually cease 
to exist. The apostle sa}/s nothing of the final fate 
reserved for the wicked, or the Devil. But the idea of 
an eternal damnation evidently lies outside the logic 
of his doctrine, which would rather require the abso- 
lute annihilation of wicked beings. It is particularly 
to be observed that Paul makes no reference to any 



THE PAULINE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY. 310 



resurrection of the wicked. 1 Xot having the principle 
of life in themselves, they cannot live again. When 
this complete victory of good over evil and life over 
death is accomplished, Christ will then restore the 
kingdom to God His Father. His office will cease 
with His triumph ; He will efface Himself in His 
turn ; and God, consummating the eternal unit}', will 
be all in all. Such is the final and glorious end of 
history. 

V. Faith, Hope, Love. 

This historical development of the kingdom of 
God remains for the present concentrated and 
summed up in the Christian consciousness. The 
main stages in this progressive life are there repre- 
sented objectively by faith, hope, love. " These three 
are," as Calvin has well said, " a brief summary of the 
whole of Christianity." 

The first in order of time is faith. It is the creative 
fact, containing the germ of the other two. Faith 
looks back towards the Divine promise and the salva- 
tion accomplished by the death of Christ. There is 
its object and its foundation. But while faith cast its 
roots into the past, and lives in the present, neither 

[ l Then we must put out of court Acts xxiv. 15. Paul shared 
the belief of his people, and of Jesus Himself, in a general 
resurrection. Comp. Dan. xii. 2 ; Matt. xxv. 32 ; John v. 28, 29. 
And "the logic of his doctrine : ' requires it. How can the retri- 
bution of 2 Thess. i. 6-io, e.g., be limited to the wicked who 
happen to be alive on earth at Christ's return ? and how other- 
wise are we to understand Rom. ii. 5, 6, or 2 Cor. v. 10, 11 {the 
things done through the body, — whether good or lad) ?] 



;2Q THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



present nor past can suffice it ; it takes possession of 
the future and becomes hope. 

Faith bears hope within it, just as the past and 
present contain the future. Hope, in truth, is only 
the development of faith ; it is the side of the soul 
which looks toward life eternal The profounder the 
discord, the more painful the contrast that exists 
between our spiritual calling as believers and our 
earthly condition, between our aspirations and our 
trials, by so much the more vivid and mighty is the 
energy with which hope springs out of faith. " In 
truth," says the apostle, " we are only saved by hope." 
Our existence here is one long affliction, a continual 
bondage (0XnJa?, arevoxcopia), in which the life of the 
spirit is repressed and fretted by the temptations, 
weaknesses, and sufferings of the flesh. " We walk 
by faith, not by sight." Hope is the prospect of 
faith. 

But the essential and abiding disposition of the 
Christian consciousness, that wherein lies its eternal 
element, and which in this character enters into faith 
and hope alike, is love. The two former are but 
temporary phases of the spiritual life ; they are the 
virtues of travellers. The third expresses the inner 
essence, the abiding and unchangeable substance of 
Christian life. Love is the very life of God. — " Now 
remain these three virtues : faith, hope, and love ; 
but the greatest of them is love" (i Cor. xiii. 13). 



CHAPTER IV. 

THE CHRISTIAN PRINCIPLE IN THE SPHERE OF 
METAPHYSICS. 

Theology. 

ALL human thought, like all life, has its source in 
God. It is impossible to follow out any idea 
for long, without tracing it to this first cause. There 
was no need for Paul to set himself to speculate, with 
a view to formulating the transcendental principles 
of his theology. His mind, exclusively religious as 
it was, rose spontaneously to God. God was the 
beginning and the end, the starting point and goal of 
his meditations. In Him is the first and ever-active 
source of that great unfolding of righteousness and 
life, in history and in the human understanding, 
which we have just surveyed. This cause is known 
as grace. 

I. Grace, Predestination. 

'II %dpis, r\ irpoOeais rod Qeov. 

It is with a sort of jealousy that Paul claims for 
God alone the entire and unconditional initiative in the 
work of redemption. This initiative on the part of 

3 2r 21 



322 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



God springs from His infinite love (Eph. i. 3, ff. ; ii. 
4-7 ; Rom. v. 8 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 14 ; 2 Thess. ii. 16). 

The apostle, as we have already said, does not 
admit the existence in God of that antithesis between 
His love and His righteousness which ecclesiastical 
theology has so often asserted. God's righteousness 
is not legal, it is not a negative virtue such as could 
be satisfied by the punishment of evil. The Divine 
power which punishes evil is called in Paul's phraseo- 
logy the wrath of God (opyr) Oeov, Rom. i. 18 ; ii. 8). 
The hiKaioavvrj Qeov is a positive virtue which im- 
parts and bestows itself, which loses itself in love. 
Righteousness, in this aspect, might be called the 
actual substance of God's love ; and love the essential 
form of His righteousness (Rom. iii. 21-26). 

The love of God, as exercised towards sinful men, 
receives the name of mercy (e\eo?, Rom. ix. 15, 16, 
23 ; Eph. ii. 4 ; 1 Tim. i. 2). It has a still more 
definite name in grace (f) %o/h?). No other word 
occurs oftener in Paul's writings. It designates the 
love of God in action, as it intervenes definitely and 
directly in the destinies of humanity in order to 
raise it. Grace, therefore, is the primary source, the 
one absolute cause of man's salvation. Since Christ 
is the essential means by which the grace of God is 
realized, it is also called the grace of Christ (Gal. i. 6 ; 
2 Cor. viii. 9 ; 2 Thess. i. 12 ; %«/ns Xpcarov, or X"P L<i 
iv Xpiaro)). As it depends entirely upon God's good 
pleasure, it is further called evSofcla (Eph. i. 5 ; Gal. i. 
15 ; 1 Cor. i. 21). It is God, in fact, who is our 
Saviour (1 Tim. i. 1 ; iv. 10 ; Tit. i. 3 ; 1 Cor. i. 21). 

This act of love by which God saves men, is a 
decree of His will superior to time, an eternal decree 
(fioykrj rod 6e\t]fjLaro^ avrov, Eph. i. 11). But while 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF COD. 



love inspires redemption, it is wisdom which conceives 
and ordains its plan (Eph. iii. 10, etc. ; Rom. xi. 33). 
This Divine plan, which is also the plan of history, is 
only fulfilled and revealed by degrees. It was un- 
known and concealed from human wisdom until the 
appearance of Christ, the perfect Revealer. Hence 
Paul calls it a mystery (fivo-r/jpiov rov OeXrjfxaTos 
aurov, Eph. i. 9 ; aocjyiav iv p,uarr\piw rrjv airoKeKpufi- 
fievrjv, 1 Cor. ii. 7). This plan is simply the outflow 
of the eternal grace of God (jiva ivSeL^r/rac iv rots 
alaxriv to uirepftdWov irXouros tj}? yapiro^ aurov, 
Eph. ii. 7). Grace is the beginning, middle, and end 
of the redemptive work, always equally sovereign and 
equally absolute. But as soon as it comes to be 
applied practically to nations and to individuals, there 
arises the inevitable question of the relation between 
this absolute action on God's part and man's free-will ; 
in other words, the terrible question of predestination. 
Divine grace has to be accepted by faith ; it cannot 
be realized in any other way. Now faith depends 
upon man ; and Paul makes most earnest appeals to 
the responsibility and freedom of the individual. But, 
on the other hand, there is nothing good found in 
man which is not the work of the grace of God ; so 
that faith itself, to begin with, exists in us as the effect 
of this grace. The apostle was led to consider human 
action from this point of view, quite as much by his 
own experience as by the logic of his belief. He 
himself was the conquest of that higher Power which, 
from the moment that it mastered him at the gates 
of Damascus, led him through the world as its slave, 
fulfilling in and through him its work upon earth 
(2 Cor. ii. 14; v. 14; I Cor. ix. 16; xv. 10). His 
apostolic vocation was based on the sense that he was 



324 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



simply an instrument in the hands of Him whom he 
preached. He felt himself in absolute dependence 
upon God. This feeling, we may add, is essential to 
all deep piety. It is the characteristic of piety to 
renounce itself, to refer everything to God, to absorb 
the individual life in the Divine activity. Predestina- 
tion, thus understood, is a normal product of religious 
faith ; and the consciousness of the former is never 
weakened without involving, and signalizing, an equal 
diminution of the latter. 

It will not be surprising, therefore, to find this 
fundamental antinomy between human freedom and 
the Divine action in the teaching of Jesus (Matt. xi. 
25; xiii. 11; xxii. 14); it pervades the New Testa- 
ment writings (1 Pet. i. 2 ; John vi. 44, and passim ; 
Acts xiii. 48). Paul is not to be credited with having 
introduced this question, but only with having made 
it part of theology. The ninth and tenth chapters 
of Romans, as is well known, contain the fullest 
declaration of the apostle's views on the subject. 

Expositors vainly endeavour to eliminate from the 
ninth chapter the idea of an absolute predestination. 
It is Paul's express object to impute nothing to man 
which can in any sense influence or determine the 
Divine will. The better to do this, he is not afraid of 
going to the length of denying all independent action 
on man's part as he stands before God. What we are 
and what we do has so little power to compel God, 
that we ever are and do it only by the will of God. 
He chooses Jacob and rejects Esau, without regard to 
their personal merit ; He hardens whom He will ; He 
shows mercy on whom it pleases Him. This thought 
has yet more outspoken expression in the illustra- 
tion of the potter and the clay, by which superficial 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 325 

minds are too easily disturbed. 1 What is the meaning 
of this simile, but to express the idea of the sovereign 
independence of the Divine working, the supreme 
causality of that absolute Will which gives account 
to no man, and from which no man has the right to 
demand account — a philosophical idea so natural and 
inevitable, that every thoughtful mind apprehends it 
at the first glance, when it has once discarded the 
assumption of a moralism which is equally superficial 
and commonplace ? 

But the worst possible misconception of the 
apostle's doctrine would be to make it amount to a 
mechanical determinism, an arbitrary and external 
decree, controlling the actions and state of individuals 
by anticipation. He devotes as much energy in the 
tenth chapter to asserting man's moral responsibility 
as he has just shown in maintaining the absolute 
and unconditional character of the Divine working. 
We now find salvation and condemnation depending 
solely on the faith or unbelief of the individual. W r e 
must not suppose that Paul intended in this way to 
limit the application of what he had before asserted. 
No ; he was absolute in his previous affirmations, and 
is equally so in these. Nor was he, as I think, in the 
slightest degree conscious of any self-contradiction. 

He does not write these three chapters from a 
speculative point of view ; nor is it the dogmatic 
question of predestination that he discusses. His 
standpoint is that of history ; and his object is to 



1 Paul invented neither the comparison nor the argument. 
I am not sure whether both did not recur frequently in the 
rabbinical discussions of the time ; but both are to be found in 
the Old Testament (comp. Isai. xlv. 9; xxix. 16 ; Jer. xviii. 2-6). 



326 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

solve an historical question — viz. the rejection of the 
Jews and the coming in of the Gentiles. Why were 
the Jews rejected ? Because they sought the right- 
eousness of works, and had not faith. "Why were the 
Gentiles received ? Because they accepted the right- 
eousness of faith. That is the first and subjective 
solution of the problem, amply satisfactory to the in- 
dividual conscience. But what relation does the faith 
of the one and the unbelief of the other bear severally 
to the Divine plan ? Paul answers unhesitatingly : it 
is fulfilled by both alike. The unbelief of the Jews 
exhibits the long-suffering of God, and His eternal 
righteousness ; the faith of the Gentiles manifests the 
riches of His mercy. God is glorified in all ; and man 
is silenced. This is the second and objective solution. 
Paul sees no contradiction between the two, because 
he will not conceive of one apart from the other, and 
because, in his view, it is precisely under the historical 
form of moral responsibility that Divine predestina- 
tion is fulfilled, human freewill having no scope 
outside of God's plans. History is the outcome both 
of Divine and human action ; it is the same reality, 
now considered from man's standpoint and now from 
that of God. The truth will be found not in sepa- 
rating these two aspects of the question, nor even 
in placing them side by side, but in blending them 
together at every point. 

II. Christologv. 

The eternal plan of God centres in the Person of 
the Redeemer. It is in and through this Person that 
grace becomes an active power, entering into the world 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 3^7 

and manifested (irecpavipaiat, Rom. iii. 2l). Paul's 
whole doctrine comes to a head in his Christology. 

Pauline Christology does not consist either in a 
simple transfer of the Messianic attributes to the 
Person of Jesus, or in investing that Person with 
metaphysical ideas borrowed from the Alexandrian 
philosophy. It is an essentially original doctrine 
which takes its rise in the actual fact of salvation, and 
is the logical outcome of that doctrine of redemp- 
tion wherein lies the very core of Paulinism. 

The Redeemer must be really man, for He could 
only save humanity by partaking of its nature and 
becoming an actual organic member thereof. On 
the other hand, it is just as necessary for Him to 
be absolutely distinct from sinful humanity ; for if 
He belonged to it simply as a part belongs to the 
whole, He Himself would have the same need of 
salvation, and could not bestow it on others. The 
human sinlessness of Jesus is, therefore, the primary 
basis of Pauline Christology. Not only does the 
apostle always, and in every place, take it for granted, 
but in a leading passage on redemption he declares 
that Christ kniiv no sin (2 Cor. v. 21). 

It is true that after the words rbv fir] yvovTct 
afjiaprtau the apostle adds dfiapriav iTroirjaev. M. 
Holsten has connected this passage with that in 
Romans viii. 3, and has maintained that in these 
two passages Paul actually attributes sin to Christ, 
as being inherent in His flesh. This interpretation 
is the logical result of the metaphysical dualism be- 
tween the flesh and the spirit which this theologian 
thinks he has found underlying Paulinism. The 
apostle, he says, could not actually invest Christ 
with a flesh like ours, without by that very means 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



attributing sin to Him. He does so very definitely 
in the words of Romans, viii. 3 : iv ofjuoico/jLCLTi aapicbs 
afiapTia? . . . fcare/cpivev ttjv dfiaprlav ev rfj <rapfci. 
If sin was destroyed and condemned in the flesh of 
Jesus, it must of course have been really there. This 
is the nerve of Paul's whole theory of redemption, and 
by cutting it you bring about a breach of continuity 
in the very basis of his doctrine : an incoherence 
which enfeebles, or even destroys it. 

The reasoning just quoted is, no doubt, very 
specious. Let us, however, follow out M. Holsten's 
idea, and see whether it is true to the logic of the 
Pauline system throughout. Sin, he says, exists in 
Christ's flesh as an actual power. Did not this sin 
make Christ a sinner ? No, answers M. Holsten ; for 
in Him the d/xapria never became irapaftaais ; this 
power of sin never brought forth transgression. Why 
not ? we inquire further. Christ lived under the law ; 
and is it not, from the Pauline point of view, inevit- 
able that the law, being the strength of sin, wherever 
sin is latent should rouse it into manifestation and 
activity ? And at this point does not M. Holsten in 
his turn destroy the internal logic of Paul's doctrine ? 
In short, either sin was not and could not be mani- 
fested in Jesus ; and in that case, what has M. Holsten 
discovered beyond that which the apostle, and the 
Church after him, call o/uloico/jlcl aap/cb<; dp,apria<;? 
Or else, the sin inherent in the flesh of Christ was 
realized in His life, and constituted Him a sinner ; 
and then how could His death effect the redemption 
of his brethren ? We are thus driven on either hand 
into a logical contradiction, far more serious than that 
which M. Holsten just now pointed out. 

We gain, therefore, no further light upon the general 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 329 

structure of the Pauline system, by interpreting the 
two passages quoted above as this theologian does ; 
while, from the standpoint of simple grammatical 
exegesis, we involve ourselves in very serious diffi- 
culties. Without doubt the words of Romans viii. 3, 
iv o/xoLfJO/iarc cra/j/co? a/uLapTLas, tend to assimilate the 
flesh of Christ to our sinful flesh ; but it is equally 
true that with this very assimilation the term ofiolcofxa 
asserts an essential difference ; or why should the 
apostle have used this expression, instead of simply 
saying iv <Tap/ci afiapTias ? In every passage where 
this word recurs it designates an approximate identi- 
fication, never an absolute material identity (comp. 
Rom. i. 23 ; vi. 5). It should be noticed, finally, in 
how general a manner the sentence in question ends. 
Paul does not say, Kareicpivev ri]v d/xaprlav iv aapKi 
avrov, in His flesh ; but, in an abstract fashion, iv rfj 
aapKi, in the flesh. Christ's flesh, therefore, only re- 
presents in a general manner the flesh of humanity. 
The two ideas of the flesh and sin are always cor- 
relative, but still dogmatically distinct. 

The analogous interpretation that M. Holsten 
gives of 2 Corinthians v. 21, is even less tenable. The 
words "God made sin Him who did not know sin," 
he understands in a material sense, as though Christ 
became sin by taking upon Him the flesh of sin. 
This obliges M. Holsten to refer the phrase iiroi^aev 
dfiapriav to the mere incarnation of the Son of God, 
and the preceding words, rbv fii] yvovra dfiaprcav, to 
the pre-existent Christ — two things equally impossible. 
In short, it is evident, with absolute clearness, that 
this passage refers solely to the Christ of history, and 
that the words iirolrio-ev ayLapriav do not allude to the 
fact of the incarnation of the Son of God, but to the 



THE APOSTLE PAUL 



death of Jesus upon the cross. But how could Christ 
at that moment become sin, except by means of an 
ideal substitution, as indeed is plainly indicated in 
the words virep rjfjLwv ? The fact of this substitution 
is the essential basis of the Pauline theory. And the 
very idea of substitution implies a distinction in the 
two terms, for otherwise it would have no meaning. 
Redemption consists precisely in this, that God sees 
in Christ that which is in us, — namely, sin ; and in us 
that which is in Christ, — namely, righteousness. No 
doubt this is a logical contradiction ; but it is the 
Divine contradiction of love. The logic of the heart 
triumphs over that of the intellect. 

The personality of Christ, then, was without sin. 
But this definition is purely negative. Paul has given 
a more positive description of His Person at the be- 
ginning of the epistle to the Romans : yevo/xivov etc 
airepfiaro^ Aa/318 Kara adpfca, optaOivTos vlov Qeov ev 
hvvd/JLei Kara nrvevjxa dyiwavvrjs ef dvaardaews veicpwv 
(i. 3, 4). There is no reference here to the miraculous 
conception of Jesus in the womb of the Virgin Mary 
by the special virtue of the Holy Spirit. Paul is 
neither combating nor confirming the narratives of 
Luke and Matthew ; he simply ignores them. The 
apostle in this passage considers the Person of Jesus 
under a twofold aspect, — as regards His external 
material frame, and His inner and spiritual nature. 
Jesus owed His earthly being to the family of David. 
But by the side of this carnal descent Paul points out 
another, higher and more mysterious origin — a Divine 
descent after the Spirit. Just as the flesh formed the 
substance of His body, so the spirit of holiness formed 
the substance of His moral being. We must note 
again the words iv hvvdfia : they explain themselves, 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 331 

provided they have as their antithesis the other ex- 
pression eV daOeveia. Jesus was the Son of God from 
the very first ; but He was the Son of God in weak- 
ness during the whole of His earthly life (ef aaBeveias 
iaravpcodr], dWd %fj i/c Swdfjuecos, 2 Cor. xiii. 4). The 
spirit of holiness which constituted His being was 
restrained within the prison of feeble flesh. But when 
the flesh was destroyed on the cross, Christ was then 
manifested, and at His resurrection appeared in power 
as the Son of God (opicrdivTos . . iv Bvvd/net, 

. . . e'f dyaardaeQ)<; vetcpwv). Death as it broke 
all fleshly bonds and destroyed every material barrier, 
set free the spirit, the very essence of His nature. 
From that moment Christ became absolutely spiritual. 
He retains a body, it is true ; but it is a spiritual one, 
which, so far from interfering with the action of the 
spirit, merely obeys and makes it manifest. The 
reign of the Redeemer does not actually begin until 
the resurrection. The risen Christ alone is the per- 
fect Christ. Then, and not till then, He appears as 
the second Adam y the celestial man (1 Cor. xv. 22, 

45-49). 

But this new designation of Christ has not the 
importance nor the metaphysical significance which 
many theologians attach to it ; it does not so much 
indicate the essential nature of Jesus, as His part 
in history as a member of humanity. The words 
6 SevTepos avOpwTros ef oupavov (ver. 47) do not in 
any wise imply pre-existence ; and it would be a 
serious mistake to conclude that in the view of the 
apostle the pre-existence of Christ was that of the 
ideal or typical man. This latter idea belongs to 
Fhilonism, and is altogether foreign to the Pauline 
system. There is a radical difference between the 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



two systems. Philo always takes a purely speculative 
view ; Paul adheres to the historical one. The former 
would say that the ideal man is the first, and that 
the psychical man, the imperfect reproduction of the 
Divine type, comes afterwards ; the latter, on the con- 
trary, expressly says that the psychical man appears 
first, and then the spiritual man. The Sevrepos 
av6pa)7ros of which the apostle here speaks, is not 
the pre-existent, but the risen Christ, as the whole 
context sufficiently proves. The antithesis asserted 
between the words etc t?}? 777? j(oitcb<; and e'f ovpavov 
iirovpdvio^; has no bearing on the idea of priority, but 
solely on that of. quality ; a fact so unmistakable, 
that in the same passage Christians themselves are 
called iiTovpdvLov (comp. Phil. iii. 20). Paul's object 
is not to establish the fact of Christ's pre-existence to 
Adam, but of His essentially different nature. 

Leaving, therefore, this conception of the heavenly 
man — which is wholly misleading — we will return to 
the far more fruitful idea of the spirit of holiness, the 
very essence of Christ. Paul has not only said that 
the Lord is a life-giving spirit (wvevfia ^wottoiovv), he 
goes further, and adds, " The Lord is the spirit itself" 
(6 Se Kvpios to TTvevfid iarriv, 2 Cor. iii. 17). It must 
not be asserted that in Paul's view the Lord is spirit 
because He has become a life-giving spirit in the 
soul of believers ; He only became a principle of 
immanent life in them, because He is spirit in His 
very essence. Thus we reach this new definition. 
Christ is the Spirit Himself personified, the Divine 
Spirit in the form of human individuality. 

Here we reach the very centre of the Pauline 
Christology. It is with this most original conception 
of the Divine essence of Jesus Christ that we must 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OP GOD. 



associate the fact of His pre-existence. Paul, as we 
have seen, does not assert the pre-existence of the 
heavenly man, the second Adam ; but he does assert 
that of the Son of God (Gal. iv. 4 ; Rom. viii. 32 ; 
1 Cor. viii. 6 ; 2 Cor. viii. 9). Christ was in God, 
antecedently to creation, the original form of His 
existence being Divine (eV fiop^rj 0eov virdp^cov, Phil, 
ii. 6 ; Col. i. 15). This pre-existence, however, is not 
the Divine eternity, and we are still far from the 
Trinitarian formulae of Nicaea. The phrase of Colos- 
sians, irpayTOTOrCo? irdar]^ /cTureco?, even implies the 
opposite ; while raising Jesus above creation, it still 
links Him closely to it. The Person of Christ is not 
the absolute ; it is neither the supreme cause, nor the 
final end of the universe. His very existence, accord- 
ing to the apostle, seems to depend on that of the 
world of which it is the Divine type, the perfect 
resume (dvarcecpakai'joaaaOai ra irdvra iv tw XpiarfZ, 1 
Eph. i. 10). The pre-existent Christ, like the his- 
torical Christ, remains essentially Mediator. His 
Person, if we may so speak, is the metaphysical locus 
at which God and creation meet. 

How did Paul represent to himself this pre- 
existence ? What was its mode ? Was it a personal, 
or simply an ideal existence ? The apostle is not 

I 1 But this, as the entire context shows, is "the (historical) 
Christ," the centre and sum of the Divine plans for the world. 
Nothing is said here of the pre-existent Christ. Is not eler?iity 
involved in the fxopcfiy ®eov of Phil. ii. 6? If the existence of 
the historical Christ depends on that of the created world, the 
existence of the latter depends in turn, according to Paul's logic 
— and according to M. Sabatier's — on the pre-existence of the 
Divine Christ, whom Col. i. 15-17 " links" indeed "to creation," 
but with an infinite disparity of nature. Comp. note on p. 243. 



334 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



very explicit on the point. We are disposed to think 
that his doctrine on this subject halted at a middle 
point, somewhat difficult to seize, between the two 
opinions, a position implying something less than the 
one theory and more than the other. The latter 
view is purely abstract ; and the Hebraic genius 
neither favoured nor understood abstractions. The 
former might seem to lend itself to schemes of Divine 
and mythological genealogy ; and might easily be 
pushed to Docetic consequences. Paul seems to 
have avoided both these snares. The pre-historical 
action of Christ is blended with that of the Divine 
TLvevfia. It was this Divine Spirit which appeared 
as a human person in Christ ; and it is difficult, if not 
impossible, to conceive His separate pre-existence. 

However that may be, the principle of the Divine 
Sonship of Christ is precisely that Divine Spirit which 
constitutes its essence. Paul does not call Jesus the 
Son of God because he has found in Him the Messiah. 
The term vlos zov Oeov implies, to his thinking, some- 
thing very different. Jesus is the Son of God, because, 
being the spirit of holiness, He proceeds in His 
essence from the Divine nature. This spirit forms an 
essential bond of relationship between the Father and 
the Son. Thus Paul calls Christ in a very special 
sense God's own Son {Ihlov vlov, Rom. viii. 32). This 
is because Christ, when coming to dwell in our souls, 
brings thither His own substance, His Spirit, so that 
we also in our turn become in and through Him sons 
of God (viol rov Seov), co-heirs with Christ. The 
Spirit of Jesus is therefore called the Spirit of adop- 
tion (irvevfia vloOeaids, -'Rom. viii. 15). We are thus 
raised to the same plane as Christ, and become in 
fact His brethren (e£? to elvai avrov irpcoroTo/cov iv 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 335 



7ro\\oi? dSe\$ot?, Rom. viii. 29). This dignity, how- 
ever, is with us purely a favour ; but with Him a 
natural right. We have to rise ; He had to stoop ! 
Christ, in short, is God's own Son, — essentially His. 
We are, and shall always be so by adoption only. 

Lastly, this same virtue of the Spirit which is in 
Christ, is the foundation of His sovereign dominion 
(T770-0O? Kvpios, 1 Cor. xii. 3) over the historical 
development of humanity. This sovereignty is not 
limited to the work of redemption ; or rather, His 
work itself is universal in scope, and links itself to 
creation as an essential stage in the evolution of the 
world. Hence the creation is nothing more than 
the beginning of redemption ; and the latter is the 
completion of creation ; so that in the end each alike 
finds its place within the sphere of Christ. In Him 
and by Him God created all things, just as in Him 
and by Him He reconciles all things to Himself. 

The starting-point of this Christological theory is 
still the work of salvation. The cross is the centre 
of that vast circumference which includes the whole 
work of Christ. The sovereignty of the Lord coin- 
cides with His redemptive mission, and is only of the 
same duration. The former ceases with the consum- 
mation of the latter. Its constant tendency therefore, 
if I may venture to use the expression, is to render 
itself needless. So Paul in all his epistles maintains 
a strict distinction between the Lord (Kvptos) and the 
supreme God. Everything has to be subjected to 
Christ, except God ; but when everything shall have 
been subjected to Him, the Son in His turn will 
submit himself to God (teal clvtos 6 uto?). He will 
restore the kingdom to God His Father, in order that 
God may be all in all (1 Cor. xv. 28). 



336 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Christ's office will then terminate. But here a last 
question presents itself. At the close of this evolu- 
tion, what will be the final and natural position of the 
Saviour? Will He re-enter humanity as the eldest 
among many brethren, or will He return to the bosom 
of God as an integral member of the Divinity ? The 
second is the ecclesiastical opinion ; the first, we 
believe, is Paul's ; at least, it is that which the logic 
of his system seems to require. Paul, in fact, is not 
explicit on this point. Had the question been pre- 
sented to him, he would probably have dismissed 
it as idle. It could not really occur, from the stand- 
point of the Pauline theology. As soon as we reach 
the final stage, the moment when God shall be all 
in all, it seems decidedly superfluous to discuss the 
categories of the Divine and human further, since 
from that time they are resolved into each other. On 
the other hand, this submission of Christ to God, this 
resignation into the Father's hands, cannot possibly 
be regarded as a downfall or abasement of the Son. 
On the contrary, will it not be the grandest moment 
of His triumph ? He will remain united to humanity, 
not by stooping again to it, but by its elevation to 
Himself. 

The Christological conception which best corre- 
sponds with Paul's ideas still seems to me that of 
the God-man. The human and Divine elements of 
His nature are firmly maintained to the end. How 
did Paul harmonize them ? This question seems not 
to have perplexed him, or even crossed his mind. 
He carried out his various lines of thought boldly, 
starting with the great fact of redemption, without 
concerning himself with the metaphysical problem 
which they involved. The basis of Paul's system was 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 



soteriological and experimental. On this foundation 
he had slowly raised a most elaborate mental struc- 
ture. The edifice was never completed ; and the 
efforts since made by ecclesiastical theology to finish 
it have sufficiently proved the apostle's wisdom, and 
the impotence of speculation. 

III. The Father, the Lord, the Spirit. 

Hari]p, 6 Kvpios, to ayiov Uvevfjua. 

Since we have not found the ecclesiastical Chris- 
tology in Paul's epistles, neither must we expect to 
find there the doctrine of the Trinity. 1 The triad 
forming the title of this chapter is very different from 
that of the Xicene formulary. The apostle, who 
does not admit the equality of Christ and the Father, 
seems to have been equally without the notion of the 
personality of the Holy Spirit. To him the Spirit is 
evidently a Divine power and faculty, not yet a dis- 
tinct Person. He does, however, make distinctions 
in the Divine working, which may be regarded as a 
starting point for subsequent speculation and for 
ecclesiastical metaphysics : f) yapis rod Kvpiov 'Irjcrov 
Xpiarov, teal rj aydirrj rod Geov, /cat rj koivwvicl rod aytou 
nvevfiaro? (2 Cor. xiii. 14; comp. 1 Cor.xii. 4-1 1). This 
formula simply expresses the unity and sequence of 

[ l Supposing Paul's Trinitarianism to be adequately represented 
here (and this will be disputed), we still remember that Paul 
was not the only, nor the last, exponent of New Testament 
doctrine. The theology of the Church has to take account of 
John as well as Paul. On the doctrine of the essential tri-unity 
of God, in its biblical and ecclesiastical developments, see the 
profound and well-balanced discussion of Dorner, System of 
Christian Doctrine, vol. i., pp. 344-412.] 

22 



THE APOSTLE PAUL 



the historical development of salvation, in its essential 
stages : the love of the Father which is its permanent 
cause, the grace of Jesus the Lord which makes it 
manifest, and the Holy Spirit who gives it reality 
within the soul. The very order of the apostle's words 
shows how far he was from any metaphysical design. 
Not only did Paul's theology terminate otherwise 
than the traditional theology, not only does the 
dogma of the Trinity lie outside its scope, but it 
seems to me that, instead of seeking in such a dogma 
his final conclusion and the crown of his system, he 
has found both in the absolute idea of God. 



IV. The Conception of God. 

O &eb<; rd iravTO, iv iraariv. 

God is one (el<? @eo? 6 Uar^/5, I Cor. viii. 6). Of 
Him, by Him, and for Him are all things (ef avrov 
Kal hi avrov fcal eh avrov rd irdvra, Rom. xi. 36). 
He is the beginning, middle, and end of all existence. 
In Him every creature has its source, its life, and 
object. It was the constant aim of the apostle to 
assert this absolute and supreme causality of God in 
man, in history, and in the universe. This idea of 
the absoluteness of God is the real metaphysical basis 
of salvation by grace, justification by faith, and pre- 
destination : God does everything in redemption, as 
in creation. Again, it is the foundation of the univer- 
salism of the apostle of the Gentiles. The supreme, 
absolute God is the God of all. " Is God the God of 
the Jews ? is He not also the God of the Gentiles ? " 
(Rom. iii. 29.) Lastly, it is the basis of his religious 
philosophy of history, as sketched in the epistle to 



THE PAULINE DOCTRINE OF GOD. 339 

the Romans. This idea of the absolute unity of God, 
and of His universal and permanent activity, is just 
what constitutes the unity of human history and 
brings its every part and epoch into one plan, the 
plan of the Divine working. 

This work of God assumes different forms ; but it 
is neither intermittent nor external ; it is continuous 
and immanent. The world and God are indeed 
essentially distinct, but not separate. God works 
upon, and in the world ; He permeates and trans- 
forms it ; He reveals Himself in it ; " He manifests in 
the world His eternal power and His Divinity " (kom. 
i. 20). God reveals Himself still more fully in the 
redemption, which is the consequence and completion 
of creation, the last stage of progress in the Divine 
activity. Christ is the medium of this revelation. In 
Him it is concentred. He conveys, and communicates 
it. God has poured His Godhead into Him ; He 
becomes the pleroma of God, as the Church in its turn, 
embracing in its extended sphere the universe, is the 
pleroma of Christ (Eph. i. 23 ; Col. ii. 9). Everything 
comes from God ; everything returns to Him. The 
perfect union of God and His creation — that is the 
glorious end of all things. 

By pushing this view and these declarations of the 
apostle to their strict consequences in the way of 
formal and abstract logic, it would be easy to deduce 
from them a sort of dialectical pantheism. But let 
us remember once more, that Paul never indulged in 
pure speculation ; his reasonings advanced from expe- 
rience to principles, but were never wrought out by 
the method of abstract deduction. God does not be- 
come lost in the world ; the world is transfigured into 
the Divine. The apostle's metaphysics are strictly 



340 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



theistic. While he does not distinguish a plurality of 
Persons in God, he maintains the existence in Him 
of an inner personal life — that of the Spirit which 
searches the depths of God (i Cor. ii. 10). The Spirit, 
therefore, is in God Himself, as in us, the essential 
principle of consciousness, knowledge, and personality. 
The God of Paul is a living God (i Thess. i. 9). His 
true name is that which Jesus gave Him : @eo? teal 6 
Tlarjjp (1 Cor. viii. 6). This name of FATHER is the 
first word, and the last, in the gospel of the great 
apostle. 



APPENDIX ON THE EPISTLES TO 
TIMOTHY AND TITUS. 

By Geo. G. Findlay, B.A. 



THE following essay on the Epistles of Paul to Timothy 
and Titus ' is appended to this volume on the sug- 
gestion of the General Editor of the series, and with the 
consent, freely and courteously granted, of the distinguished 
author, M. A. Sabatier. Those who are responsible for the 
English translation of Eapotre Paul regard the Pastoral 
Epistles as having a good right to bear St. Paul's name, and 
as therefore demanding a place in the history of his doctrine. 
Deprived of these documents, it appears to us that the 
representation of the apostle's work in teaching and found- 
ing the Church is incomplete. AVe are no longer able to 
trace the progress of his thoughts, and the unfolding of his 
plans and hopes for the future to their latest stage. The 
interpreters who reject or distrust these writings, and who 
believe that the closing verses of the Acts of the Apostles 
have said the last word of Paul's history, are compelled to see 
his sun set before its time ; they terminate his career with 
a sudden and mysterious eclipse. The pensive hours of 
evening, the broken yet touching accents of old age, the 
final directions and warnings to his children of the father 
who knows that it is time to set his house in order and to 
resign his earthly charge, the dying testimony and the last 
farewell — these pathetic elements of the drama of life are 
wanting to the image of the great apostle, if the letters to 
Timothy and Titus are not truly his own. We do not say 
this by way of plea for their authenticity, nor in order to 
enlist a sentimental pre-judgment in their favour, but in 

1 This essay is in substance a reprint of the articles on "St. Paul 
and the Pastoral Epistles," and " Doctrine and Church in the Pastoral 
Epistles," that appeared in the London Quarterly Review for October, 
I §89 and 189Q. 



344 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

justification of our attempt, which possibly may seem invi- 
dious or presumptuous, to supplement the masterly work 
here presented to the English public. Convinced of the 
genuineness and the importance of the Pastoral Epistles, 
and regretting that our author is obliged to leave their place 
vacant in his admirable picture, we thought it right to en- 
deavour, with however inferior art, to fill in the unoccupied 
space in the canvas. We desire, in effect, to add a fourth, 
completing section to the analysis of " Paul's theological 
system" given above (Book V.), under this title : The 
Christian Principle in the Sphere of Ethics and Church Life 
{The Care of Souls). 

The Appendix necessarily assumes a polemical shape. 
We are compelled to vindicate, while we expound the 
Pastoral Epistles. But the writer has directed his apologetic 
to a practical and constructive aim. Indeed no defence of 
documents such as these can be satisfactory, or thoroughly 
valid, which does not disclose in them a lesson for all time, a 
message and doctrine worthy of the apostle of the Gentiles, 
basing itself by its intrinsic character and import upon his 
fundamental teaching and the mission of his life. 

I. The Pastoral Epistles in Modern Criticism. 

The Pastoral Epistles were the first of the writings bear- 
ing St. Paul's name to be denounced by modern historical 
scepticism. They are the last which it seems likely to 
release from its grasp. Schleiermacher, from whom the 
theology of the present century has received in so many 
directions its initiative, in the year 1807 definitely raised 
this critical problem. He attempted to show on internal 
grounds that the "so called" First Epistle of Paul to 
Timothy was in reality a compilation from 2 Timothy and 
Titus, worked over and adapted to post-apostolic times. 
Eichhorn, in his Introduction, and de Wette still more 
decidedly in his Commentary, extended the same doubts 
to all three epistles. These attacks, were, however, of a 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 345 



desultory and negative character, and left the origin of the 
documents unexplained. They proved to be the prelude 
to a far more dangerous assault, directed against the histo- 
rical character and claims of the New Testament generally, 
which was commenced in the year 1835 by the epoch- 
making work of F. C. Baur, of Tubingen, on the " so called 
Pastoral Epistles of the apostle Paul." In this discussion 
Baur first developed his peculiar critical method, and laid 
down the principles on which the Tendency School has 
based its reconstruction of the history of the Primitive 
Church and the growth of the New Testament canon. 

The preface of this manifesto contains the following 
pregnant sentences: 

"I, at least, cannot see how the question [of authorship] is to be 
decided otherwise than in relation to the historical phenomena of the 
entire period in which these letters originated — that is to say, in the 
light of the history of the first two centuries. It is only after such 
inquiry that we shall be in a position to show where, in the course of 
these phenomena, the place of the writings in question is to be found." 

The Tubingen master found in the Pastoral Epistles a 
product of second-century orthodoxy, written under cover 
of the apostle's name, as polemical tractates against the 
Gnosticism of the time, and in the interest of catholic 
Church union and ecclesiastical discipline. From the stand- 
point gained in this essay, Baur proceeded to attack the 
other Pauline writings, leaving at last only the four major 
epistles standing as authentic remains of the veritable Paul. 

The defenders of the New Testament have by this time 
driven back the Tubingen assault along the whole line. 
Baur's successors in Germany have, in almost every instance, 
retreated from the extreme positions of their leader • and the 
genuineness of all the thirteen epistles, with the exception 
of the Pastorals and Ephesians, is admitted by one or other 
of the leading negative critics. With these writers we must 
range, on this particular question, other scholars of emi- 
nence, who are undoubtedly on the side of faith in Jesus and 



346 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



the Resurrection, such as Harnack 1 of Germany, and the 
lamented Dr. Edwin Hatch, 2 of Oxford, along with Professor 
Sabatier, 3 who decline to accept the letters to Timothy and 
Titus in their canonical form as genuine writings of the 
apostle Paul. 

Those who hold by the Pauline authorship are therefore 
called upon to give some reason for their faith. And this 
is the more needful in view of the revived interest visible 
on many sides in questions of Church history and polity, 
which cannot fail to bring these documents into the front 
of the field of controversy. We want to be sure of the 
ground on which we stand.- Of what practical use are these 
epistles to us, if it remain doubtful whether they are the 
genuine expression of St. Paul's mind ; or whether they have 
not been imposed on the Church by some clever ecclesiastic 
of the second century, and embody in reality the ideas and 
aims prevailing in the Church at that very different epoch ? 
The question of the genuineness of the Pastorals is vital 
to our entire conception of the apostolic Church. It was 
essential to Baur's theory of early Christianity that their 
spuriousness should first of all be demonstrated. If they 
can be proved genuine, the whole Tubingen construction 
falls to the ground. On the other hand, let these epistles 
.be struck out of the canon, and while the fundamental 
doctrines of the Gospel remain unimpaired, we should still 
feel ourselves greatly impoverished, missing not only some 
that we have counted amongst the most precious passages 
of inspired Scripture, but robbed of much that has helped 
(as we thought) to form our view of the life and growth, the 
difficulties and temptations of the early Church — of much, 
too, of precious import bearing on the history and inner 
mind of the great apostle. 

1 See the Expositor, 3rd series, v. 335, note 1. 

2 Article "Pastoral Episties," in the Encyclopedia Britttnnica, 
ninth edition. 

3 See pp. 263-272 above; also article " Pastorales, " in the EttQ'' 
clopedie des Saoiccs religienscs, 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 347 



Great as our loss would be, we must still submit to it, if 
the Church proves to have been deceived in these long 
treasured writings. "We can do nothing against the truth."' 
To foreclose such questions and forbid inquiry into the 
authenticity and historical worth of canonical writings on 
dogmatic grounds or on the authority of ecclesiastical tra- 
dition, is a useless and, for Protestant Churches, a suicidal 
policy. The Bible has nothing to fear from honest criticism. 
In the case of these epistles, we are persuaded that it con- 
cerns historical truth even more than Christian orthodoxy, 
that they should be cleared from the suspicions cherished 
against them. 

The interpretation of these books, it is to be regretted, 
has fallen behind that of the other epistles of St. Paul. A 
more complete and penetrating exegesis would, we imagine, 
set some controverted passages in a different light, and 
would reveal connexion of thought and historical relevance 
in what often seems pointless and obscure. Bishop Ellicott's 
grammatical method, admirable and indispensable within 
its limits, scarcely touches the crucial difficulties of the 
subject. Huther's industry and good sense are only a 
partial substitute for the exegetical genius of Meyer, 1 whose 
work unfortunately terminated with the epistles to Colos- 
sians and Philemon. English students miss still more in 
this obscure field the help of the broad and luminous 
scholarship and the fine literary tact of Bishop Lightfoot, 
— for whose guidance, alas ! we must look no more. 

Dr. Wace has supplied a powerful vindication of the 
Pastorals in his Introduction to the Speaker's Commentary, 
and Canon Farrar in the appendix to his St. Paul; Dr. 
Salmon in his masterly Introduction to the New Testament, 
and, finally, Dr. Plummer, in his excellent and most useful 



1 This great critic has ranged himself amongst the opponents of 
authenticity. His "remark" on the epistles to Timothy and Titus 
appended to sect. 1 of the "Introduction" to his Commentary on 
Komans, amounts, however, to little more than an ipse dixit. 



34$ THE AFOSTLE PAUL. 

commentary in the " Expositor's Bible," have carried on 
the defence very effectively. Dr. Samuel Davidson, on the 
other side, in the last edition of his Introduction to the New 
Testament, gives a complete and lucid summary of the nega- 
tive arguments. In Germany, Wiesinger, the collaborateur 
of Olshausen, and Hofmann, amongst other defenders of 
the Pauline authenticity, have grappled with the subject in 
its modern aspects with conspicuous ability. Hofmann's 
exposition, 1 though marred by his caprice and super- 
subtlety, has materially advanced the study of these writings. 
Dr. Ernst Kiihl has, likewise put us under great obligations 
by his keen and judicial essay on the " Church Order of 
the Pastoral Epistles " (Die Tremeinde-ordming in dm Pas- 
toral-brief en. Berlin, 1885). 

Holtzmann's recent work on the subject 2 contains the 
most full and authoritative treatment which it has received 
from the opponents of authenticity. He maintains, follow- 
ing Baur, that the letters originated with the orthodox 
Church party in Rome about the year 140 of our Lord. 
Holtzmann, however, lays less emphasis on their anti- 
heretical and more upon their " catholicizing " tendency 
than did his predecessors, . regarding it as the principal 
object of these writings to confirm Church authority and 
surround it with an apostolic halo. Connected with this 
purpose, in his view, was the endeavour of the unknown 
author to strike a blow at Gnostic heresy, in the form 
that it was assuming toward the middle of the second cen- 
tury. Pfleiderer, in his great critical work on the Chris- 



1 Die heilige Schrifi neneti Testamentes zusammenhangend unter- 

suchi. Sechster Theil (Timotheus u. Titus). Nbrdlingen, 1874. Hof- 
mann appears to unusual advantage in this volume, where he is free 
from the rivalry of Meyer. 

2 Die Pastoralbriefe, kritisch unci ' exegetisch behandelt. Leipzig, 1880. 
The exegetical part of the book does not strike one as containing much 
that is original or valuable. The " critical behandling " has taken the 
life out of Holtzmann's exegesis. It reads like a post mortem inquiry. 
So soon as the epistles are detached from the personality of St, Paul, 
their living purpose and meaning are gone, 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. U9 



tian origins, Das Urchristenthum, returns to Baur's opinion 
as to the date of the epistles ; in the Paulinismus he had 
referred them to a somewhat earlier period. The picture 
which the epistles give of Church organization and of here- 
tical teaching — a confused representation, as Holtzmann 
regards it — he attributes to the attempt of the falsarius to 
combine the notions of his own day with what he imagined 
proper to St. Paul. 

This theory, it will be seen, makes decided concessions 
to the defensive criticism. It admits a large element of 
Pauline verisimilitude previously denied. 1 And it ascribes 
to the supposed ecclesiastical romancer a conscious, and 
largely successful, reproduction of the social and mental 
conditions of a bygone age, as well as of the dialect and 
manner of the apostle — a kind of success, so far as we know, 
quite unexampled and foreign to the literary habits and 
attainments of early Christian writers. 2 

Holtzmann is a veteran critic, and master of many legions 
in the field of biblical scholarship. In this work he brings 
them all into the battle. In his five hundred closely printed 
pages of multifarious learning and keen analysis, the fruit 

1 Kenan's account of the Pastorals {L'eglise ckreticnne, pp. 95-106, 
and Saint Pan/, pp. xxiii.-lii.) indicates a certain reaction against the 
extreme rigour of the Baurian hypothesis. M. Kenan's literary con- 
science saves him from endorsing the charges of feebleness and vapidity 
■which it suits the Tendency critics to make against these writings. 
"Some passages of these letters," lie says, "are so beautiful, that we 
cannot help asking whether the forger had not in his hands some 
authentic notes of St. Paul, which he incorporated in his apocryphal 
composition." Again he writes, "What runs through the whole is 
admirable practical good sense. . . . The piety our author advo- 
cates is wholly spiritual. You can perceive the influence of St. Paul, 
. . a sort of sobriety in mysticism, a great fund of rectitude and 
sincerity." This in a forger ! In M. Kenan paradox often verges 
upon jest. Renan dates the epistles about 100 A.D. 

- Contrast this extraordinary skill of the supposed falsarius in 
mimicking the style, sentiment, and doctrine of Taul with the bungling 
failure of his attempt, on the "critical" hypothesis, to fit his com- 
positions into the historical framework given him in the Acts of the 
Apostles. Who ever heard of a forger at once so clever and so stupid 
-^30 adroit and maladroit? 



iS^ 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



of immense industry, the subject is exhausted. Not a point 
is missed ; not a single contribution to the study of the 
question, of any moment, seems to be overlooked. Every- 
thing is said that criticism can possibly say. It is well if 
our poor little letters are not crushed by the mere weight of 
the ponderous indictment ! May we dare to say that we 
rise from a repeated perusal of this able and exhaustive 
book more convinced than ever that Paul, and no other, wrote 
the epistles to Timothy and Titus from the first page to the 
last? Holtzmann's work is admirable as a critical iour de 
force. If we might forget the conditions of historical and 
literary construction, and imagine ourselves in a world 
peopled by vocabularies and phrase-books, where sentences 
come together and works of literature are composed by 
some kind of elective affinity or fortuitous concourse of 
verbal atoms, then such theories would be plausible. Their 
condemnation is that, as M. Sabatier says (p. 234), they 
are so " little embarrassed by their impracticability." Try 
as we will, we cannot form any coherent mental image of 
such a writer as the Tendency School would have us ima- 
gine for these letters. 

Indeed Holtzmann's hypothesis of the Pastorals, like 
some other of his critical reconstructions, is its own re- 
futation. It breaks down by its very ingenuity. No 
fabricator of the second century was clever enough to 
need all this ado to find him out. It would have required 
a skill surpassing that of the detectives to contrive a plot 
that still seems to baffle them. The cunning interpolations 
and imitations, the deft touches of Pauline colouring, the 
veiled allusions and nicely calculated introduction of matter 
relevant to later times which the critics with incredible 
acuteness have discovered, the deceptive air of truthfulness 
and unstudied freshness which the pseudo-Paul has thrown 
over his work — all this belongs to the literary artifice of the 
nineteenth century. Baur and his disciples have projected 
their own subtlety and the accomplishments of their cul- 



the pastoral epistles. 



tured professional circles into the Christian mind of the 
second century, to which such aptitudes were wholly want- 
ing. At the same time they impute to that mind a readi- 
ness to deceive and to be deceived, which is contrary to 
what we know of its character. The early Church neither 
could invent such documents as these, nor would have 
entertained them, so invented, without grave questioning. 
For specimens of fictitious early Christian literature, we 
have the pseudo-Clementine books, the Apocryphal Gospels, 
and the Epistle to the Laodiceans ; and who would say that 
these writings approach in any degree to the vraisemblaiice 
of our epistles— or to their success ? 

The external attestation of these epistles is met in an 
evasive and unsatisfactory way by the Tendency critics. 
They habitually minimize the force of patristic evidence. 
Holtzmann devotes to this branch of the subject but njne 
out of his 282 pages of criticism, reserving it for a con- 
cluding subsection of his argument (pp. 257-266). It 
would be impossible to express more decidedly than Holtz- 
mann does in this way, one's contempt for the judgment of 
the great Church leaders who established the New Testa- 
ment canon. Weiss's statement, that " the Pastoral epistles 
are as strongly attested as any writings of Paul," remains 
unshaken. Holtzmann himself admits it to be nearer the 
truth than the hardy assertion of Baur, to the effect that 
they are supported by " no testimony of any weight earlier 
than the end of the second century." How Holtzmann 
reconciles their acknowledged use in the epistles of Ignatius 
. and Polycarp with the date he assigns to them, we are at a 
loss to understand. Marcion, with Tatian (in regard to 1 
and 2 Timothy), and some other Gnostics, alone dissented 
from the Church of the second century in this matter; but 
Marcion must have ceased to be a Marcionite, if he had 
given a place in his Apostolicon to these writings. Now 
that it is demonstrated that Marcion's Luke - the only 
Gospel he accepted — was a mutilated edition of the canoni 



THE APOSTLE PAUL 



cal Third Gospel, 1 his name ceases to be of weight in ques- 
tions of canonicity. Tertullian's reference to Marcion on 
this point implies that Marcion knew these books and 
excluded them from the list of Pauline epistles, where they 
already held a recognised place. If Tertullian is to be 
trusted, we can therefore trace as far back as the middle of 
the second century, not the origin, but the general recog- 
nition and ecclesiastical use of the Pastoral Epistles ; and this 
involves their previous diffusion through the Church, and 
a considerable term of pre-existence. This is but one point 
out of several in - which recent investigation has brought out 
more clearly the force and definiteness of the testimony 
to their early reception. " If the battle had to be fought on 
the ground of external evidence," Dr. Salmon justly says, 
" the Pastoral epistles would gain a complete victory." 

But we must now betake ourselves to the field of internal 
criticism. Here, we hasten to admit, there are difficulties 
and obscurities which call for inquiry, such as in the 
modern critical mind were bound to awaken misgiving. 
Chief amongst these is the fact — now generally admitted, 
and against which apologists like Otto and Wieseler, and 
even Reuss in his earlier discussions, have contended in 
vain — that no place exists for the Pastorals in the scheme 
of Paul's life given us in the Acts of the Apostles. On 
the other hand, Luke's biography expressly leaves the 
apostle's story unfinished; and if there be evidence sufficient 
to prove these letters written by St. Paul, they become 
themselves a decisive proof that his life extended beyond 
the point reached in Acts xxviii. Against this supposition 
there is no counter-evidence of any positive worth. The 
testimony of tradition, such as it is, 2 inclines in its favour. 



1 See Sanday's Gospels in the Second Century, and the section on 
" Marcion's Gospel " in Salmon's Introduction to the New Testament. 

a It is strange, indeed, that the Church preserved so shadowy a 
recollection of later apostolic times. With the last sentence of the 
Acts the curtain drops suddenly upon an unfinished scene, full of 
light and action, which we were watching with the most eager interest. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 353 

The record of the Acts, if it does not supply the historical 
basis of these epistles, at any rate leaves the ground clear 
for them. Granting, however, their fullest force to the 
embarrassments and uncertainties of the traditional view, 
it appears to us, on a candid re-examination, that the 
difficulties in the way of the contrary hypothesis are very 
considerably greater, and amount, in fact, to a literary and 
historical impossibility. 

We proceed to examine, in support of this position, the 
vocabulary and style of the Pastoral Epistles ; their persoiial 
and circumstantial details ; their doctrinal features ; and the 
ecclesiastical situation which they assume. 

II. Vocabulary and Style. 

In examining the vocabulary of the Pastorals every 
observer is struck by the number of their hapax-legomena. 
Holtzmann (pp. 86-95) enumerates seventy-four in the six 
chapters of 1 Timothy, forty-six in the four of 2 Timothy, 
and twenty-eight in the three of Titus ; to these add twenty- 
three verbal peculiarities common to two or more of the 
letters, and we have a total of 171 out of 897, or nearly a 
fifth of the words of the Pastorals, w r hich are found nowhere 
else in the New Testament. (The list given in the valuable 
appendices to the Grimm-Thayer New Testament Lexicon 
agrees closely with this estimate.) On the first blush of the 
matter, this looks suspicious. The epistle to the Hebrews, 
whose authorship we cannot claim for St. Paul, contains 
in its thirteen longer chapters a slightly smaller number ot 
hapax-legomena. The epistle of James, the only extant 
w r ork of its author, in five chapters has but seventy-three, 



It seems, to change the figure, as though the glare of the fires of 
burning Rome and Jerusalem had thrown all contemporary events into 
the shade. Christian minds were so occupied and overwhelmed with 
the national convulsions taking place, which in view of the prophecies 
of Christ appeared to portend the end of the world, that personal inci- 
dents remained unrecorded or left but a faint impress on the memory. 

2 3 



354 



THE APOSTLE PAUL 



one less than i Timothy with six ; while the Apocalypse, 
with all its specialty of matter, has only 156 such words in 
its twenty-two chapters. 

But let us compare the vocabulary of the Pastorals with 
that of other Pauline epistles, and the matter assumes a 
different aspect. The apostle Paul excelled his companion 
writers in the New Testament in versatility ot expression, 
no less than in intellectual breadth and force. And we are 
able to trace a gradual advance in the freedom and variety 
of his dialect. In the two Thessalonian epistles, forming 
the first group of his writings, there is an average of five 
hapax-legomena to the chapter ; in Romans, of the second 
group, the average number is nearly seven ; in Ephesians 
and Colossians taken together, eight; in Philippians, a little 
later— although the subject-matter is of so general a pur- 
port — the figure reaches ten. It is not surprising, therefore, 
that the Pastorals furnish thirteen hapax-legomena to the 
chapter, especially when it is considered that this is the last 
group of the four, and that if later writings from the same 
hand had been extant, the list of its peculiarities would in 
all likelihood have been reduced. The regular progres- 
sion of the above figures marks them as belonging to one 
and the same series. They show in St. Paul a writer whose 
mind, fixed as it was in its essential principles, yet never 
grew stereotyped nor encased itself in set phrases and 
formulae, but to the last was active and sensitive, taking on 
new colours and modes of expression from its changing 
environment. 

That this is the true interpretation of the statistics we 
have given is confirmed by the variety of language apparent 
in this single group. Only a ninth of their entire voca- 
bulary is common to the three epistles, notwithstanding their 
close connexion of thought. This ninth of the whole 
forms a third of the words of Titus — evidently the middle 
letter of the group, as it is the least peculiar ; somewhat 
less than a fourtJi of its verbiage occurs, in neither of its 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 355 

comrades ; and the remainder, nearly a half, it shares with 
one or other of the two, but not with both. Now an imi- 
tator, seeking to palm off his writings as St. Paul's, would 
presumably have followed the language of his exemplar 
more closely than the actual writer has done ; he would 
infallibly have repeated himself more frequently, when he 
had once formed a dialect which he thought would pass for 
the apostle's. 

On comparing Colossians with its neighbours, Ephesians 
and Philippians, we find it agreeing with both in a little 
less, and differing from both in somewhat more than a third 
of its vocabulary ; in the remaining third it coincides with 
one or other of the two, with Ephesians, of course, in a 
greatly preponderating degree. Of the words of Galatians, 
above two-thirds recur in the kindred Romans. These 
results correspond very closely with that given by com- 
parison of Titus with its fellows, allowance being made for 
the greater variety of matter in the earlier sets of letters. 
The author of the Pastoral Epistles has the same freedom 
and fertility of expression that distinguished the Paul of 
the accepted epistles. And after all, his language is sub- 
stantially Pauline. Out of the 726 words common to the 
Pastorals with other New Testament books, while 133 occur 
elsewhere only in non-Pauline books (including Hebrews), 
in the remaining 593, or as nearly as possible two-thirds of 
their whole lexical content — the same proportion in which 
Galatians is identified with Romans — they associate them- 
selves with the older epistles of the apostle. 

The analysis of the 171 hapax-legomena yields interest- 
ing results. A number of them are merely variations or 
characteristic words of Paul, branches of the same word- 
stem — e.g., d/coupo)?, cU'aA-ucri 1 ?, 1 eopaico/xa, cre/xi/or?;?, virepirXtQ- 



1 The first two of these belong to a small group of words, including 
also Kepdos, irpoKOTrr], aefxvbs, (nrevdojxai, by which the Pastorals are 
connected with Philippians, probably the most recent of Paul's previous 
writings. 



356 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

vd£(o, vTTOTxnroicris, cfapevaTTOLT-qs. In the earlier epistles one 
notes an increasing fondness i for compound words, some- 
times of strange and original forms. This tendency is yet 
more noticeable in the Pastorals. Out of some 200 nega- 
tive compounds (in d- or dv-) in the Greek Testament 
Lexicon, 40 are peculiar to the other Pauline epistles, and 
no less than 15 to these books alone. In Paul and the 
Pastorals alone are found compounds of frepo-, Ka\o-, kwo-, 
6p0o- ; Upo- appears but once (A. xix. 37) elsewhere. Com- 
pare, further, the peculiar derivatives of 0U0-, <£iAo- 5 xj/evSo-, 
and of Aoyo? and 4>ph v (-^pov-) in the second member, 
with their parallels in other epistles. Such comparison, 
when extending to a large number of particulars, seems to 
us to supply a peculiarly delicate test of authorship. For 
while a forger may with some success reproduce in novel 
combinations the identical language of his original, to 
create fresh words on the same analogy, and even to carry 
on further, up to the date required, the growing verbal 
habits and hobbies (if we may so say) of the master, is a 
feat of literary personation beyond belief. 

Subtracting from the Pastoral vocabulary that which is 
either contained in other Pauline letters or has its analogy 
and basis there, the residue is, for the most part, not diffi- 
cult of explanation. The bulk of the really isolated and 
extraordinary expressions of these books are due to their 
subject-matter. Faith unfeigned, sound speech zincondemned, 
the doctrine according to godliness, a spirit of discipline, a 
good degree ; the deposit, the laying o?i of hands, the presby- 
tery ; and, on the other hand, fables and endless genealogies, 
questionings and logomachies, oppositions of falsely named 
knowledge ; men diseased, puffed up, corrupted in mind and 
bereft of truth, vain talkers and deceivers, greedy of base gain, 

1 Any one who will compare the hapax-legomena of Colossians or 
Philippians with those of any of the epistles of the earlier groups, as 
given in Thayer's Appendix to Grimm's Lexicon, will easily verily this 
statement. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 357 

making shipwreck of faith — these phrases are as distinctive 
of and proper to the Pastoral Epistles as justification and 
adoption, bondage and works of law to Romans and Gala- 
tians ; or the fulness of Christ, His body the Church, princi- 
palities and powers, wisdom and mystery to Ephesians and 
Colossians. Provided there is nothing un-Pauline in their 
structure, the novelty of such words tells in no way against 
them. Xew circumstances, in a mind like St. Paul's, in- 
evitably call forth new ideas and expressions. The ques- 
tion passes from the domain of language to that of history. 
And we shall have to consider whether it was possible and 
likely that before the apostle's death the condition of things 
had come about which the expressions we have quoted 
indicate and describe. 

There is, it is curious to observe, a group of words con- 
necting these letters with the epistle to the Hebrews and 
the writings of Luke (between which, as is well known, 
there are many resemblances of language). Out of the 
133 words employed in these but not in other acknow- 
ledged letters of St. Paul, 17 belong to the epistle to the 
Hebrews, and 34 to the Third Gospel or the Acts. 1 
Amongst these are a few so rare and distinctive, that they 
strongly suggest the existence of some bond of association 
connecting the several writers with each other. We note, as 
bearing on the same point, the predilection of our author 
for medical figures and phrases, of which there are dis- 

1 See The Pauline Antilegomena, a paper by the lamented W. II. 
Simcox, in the Expositor, 3rd series, viii. 180-192 ; also Hollzmann, 
pp. 95-97. A few words are special to the three in common. Amongst 
the distinctive expressions peculiar to the Pastorals and Hebrews are 
dvviroTanTos. a<pi\apyvpos, /3e,37?\o?, inTpkireadat., koctixikos, opeyeadai, 
trpjSrfKos. Peculiar to Luke (Gospel or Acts) and the Pastorals in 
the N.T., are avoid, avrt.\ap.!3auecrdai, avrCkeyeiv, d%aptcrr6s, fivdl^eiv, 
$vva<TTT]s, e£a/)Tii"az', faypetv, {uoyovetv, vo.uodiddaKaXos. vocrcpifecrdcu, 
Treidapxew, irepiepyos, irpodoTrjs, TrpoireT7)s, <sw<ppo<svvr\. (pCKavdpwirla. 
Peculiar to the three : 5t' r,v alrlav (elsewhere 816 in St. Paul), /.leraXau- 
[3avet.v, irapaiTeiadai, Tvyx&VGiv, X^-P LV ^X eLV (elsewhere the Pauline 
e{jxapi<TTQ). In I Timothy and Hebrews alone Christ is called " medi- 
ator."' 



;5^ 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



tinct but less numerous traces in earlier epistles. 1 These 
features of the dialect of the Pastorals are naturally ex- 
plained by the intimate and prolonged companionship 
which " Luke, the beloved physician," enjoyed with the 
apostle in his declining years. The pathetic reference of 
2 Timothy iv. n, "Only Luke is with me," affords one of 
those undesigned coincidences which are of peculiar force 
in arguments of this kind. Hebrews xiii. 23, 24, supplies 
a link connecting the writer of this' epistle with Timothy 
and Rome ; and leads us to suppose that he was in touch 
with the little circle surrounding the apostle in his Roman 
prison. 

Occasional Latinisms? appearing now for the first time, 
may indicate the effect on Paul's speech of his prison-life 
in Italy and his travels in the West — probably as far as 
Spain (to " the limits of the West," Clemens Romanus). 
If there is still left, after all that has been said, a residuum 
of expressions that " defy all attempts at explanation " 
(Weiss), this will not surprise us when we remember how 
much of the circumstances of Paul's life in these latest 
years, and of his mental history, is unknown to us. Much 
the same might be said concerning the language of the 
undoubted epistles. 

When we look at the larger features of style and com- 
position, the conclusion drawn from our examination of the 
writer's vocabulary is confirmed. True, we miss here, as 
Holtzmann says, " the pervasive dialectical character," the 
organic unity and logical articulation of the major epistles ; 
although, in some instances, this defect lies with the in- 



1 On St. Lake and St. Paul, their mutual relations, see the Expositor 
(Dean Plumptre), 1st series, iv. 134-160. E.g., cancer, cauterized, dis- 
eased about questions, having itching- ears ; and especially the frequent 
recurrence of sound, wholesome, and the opposite, applied to character 
and teaching. For other epistles, see Col. ii. 19, and Lightfoot's note 
in his Commentary. 

2 E.g., tivrpbirov, o'lovs diuyuous (2Tim. iii. 8, 1 1) ; d8r]\(')T7is, irpjKpifxa 
(prccudicium), aeawpev/xeva duapricus. See Holtzmann, p. 109. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 359 

terpreter rather than the author, and we may fail to catch 
the logical thread which in reality runs through these 
detached warnings and instructions. We miss also notably 
the passion and glow, the incomparable verve of the earlier 
Paul. This is only to be expected. We are listening to 
" Paul the aged," as he called himself perhaps three years 
before this time (Philem. 9), a man broken by extreme 
mental strain and physical labour, by hardship and im- 
prisonment. In the epistle to the Romans the apostle's 
thought and style were in their noontide of strength and 
fervour ; in Ephesians we find their mellow afternoon ; and 
in the Pastorals the time of evening has arrived, with its 
shaded light and slackened step. Neither the subjects on 
which he writes, nor the need of his correspondents call for 
the effort put forth in the letters to Corinth and Rome. 
But if these writings do not exhibit the sustained power of 
the great epistles, the same power manifests itself — the 
Pauline subtlety of reasoning, and wealth of theological 
conception, and intensity of personal feeling — coming out in 
single expressions and sentences that flash with the genius 
of the old master. Who but the apostle Paul could have 
penned such passages as 1 Timothy i. 8-1 1; ii. 5-7; 2 
Timothy i. 8-12 ; iv. 6-8; Titus ii. 11-15; iii. 4-8? " E'en 
in our ashes live their wonted fires." The Church has not 
erred in discerning in these books the ring of Paul's voice 
and inspiration. 

If the logical particles of the argumentative epistles are 
missing — if ydp, for instance, recurs oftener in Galatians than 
in the three Pastorals together, and apa, IVetra, hi, wa-n-ep 
never put in an appearance — this is in favour of authenticity 
rather than otherwise. Nothing would have been easier 
for a man steeped in Paulimsm like our author, than to 
sprinkle his pages with catchwords of this kind. This 
objection applies with almost equal force to the letters ot 
the first imprisonment, which form in several respects a 
middle term between the major epistles and the Pastorals. 



J63 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



It is true, again, that instances of anacoluthon and paren- 
thesis, of the interrupted and varied periods so characteristic 
of Paul's style, are infrequent here ; but the reason for this 
is obvious — namely, that the long-drawn argument and 
passionate feeling of the great epistles are also wanting. 
Broken periods, notwithstanding, do occur, as in i Timothy 
i. 3, ff. (comp. Rom. v. 12, ff.) • 1 Timothy ii. 1, resumed in 
ver. 12 (comp. Eph. iii. 1-14) ; 1 Timothy iii. 15, f. ; Titus i. 
1-3 ; iii. 4-7. The tendency of Paul's sentences to grow out 
of shape, extending themselves indefinitely in a chain of pre- 
positional, participial, or relative clauses, reaches an extreme 
in such passages as 1 Timothy i. 18-20 (comp., for the string 
of relatives, 1 Cor. ii. 7, 8; Col. i. 27-29); iv. 1-3; vi. 13-16 ; 
2 Timothy i. 3-5, 8-12 ; Titus i. 1-4 (comp. Rom. i. 1-7) ; ii. 
11-14. These periods reproduce the Pauline manner, with- 
out the least sign of artifice or imitation. In what other 
writer can we find such looseness of grammatical construc- 
tion combined with such closeness and continuity of 
thought? "St. Paul's style," M. Renan says, "is the most 
personal that ever was — hardly a consecutive phrase in it ; 
it is a rapid conversation stenographed, and reproduced 
without correction." This is precisely the impression which 
the reading of these epistles makes on the Greek Testa- 
ment scholar. 

Let the student compare, for example, 1 Timothy ii. with 
a practical section of the early epistles— say, Romans xiii. 
He will discover an identical method and movement of mind 
in both places — injunction guarded by careful distinction 
and explanation, supported by large general principles, 
and enforced by appeals to the presence of God or of 
Christ — all this poured out as a living stream of thought, 
in the most informal manner one can conceive. Or let 
him put 1 Timothy vi. 3-12 by the side of Colossians ii. 
8 — iii. 4, as a specimen of the apostle's later polemical style. 
In each case he sets out by stating the contradiction of the 
principles condemned to the doctrine of Christ, going on 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 



to indicate the character of their professors and the out- 
come of their teaching, and concludes by urging his readers 
to pursue the opposite path and showing them its glorious 
issue. 

Among minor mannerisms in which this writer iden- 
tifies himself with St. Paul, are the argumentative use of 
oTSa in such phrases as Knowing this, But we know, etc. ; 
the reference to opponents as nvh {certain persons) ; the 
frequent use of if any, if anything else, for whosoever, what- 
ever else) the characteristic in Christ as a distinguishing 
adjunct of Christian acts and states ; the intensive use of 
77-as to heighten qualities, as all acceptation, all long-suffering, 
etc. ; the employment of -kmttzvw in the passive (exclusively 
Pauline in the New Testament, found thrice here, five times 
elsewhere) ; of /xcuWra, especially, in qualifications (four 
times here, thrice in Paul elsewhere) ; the agreement of 
ocrris with its predicate (i Tim. iii. 15, six times in other epp. ; 
Acts xvi. 1 2 is different) ; and the accusative of apposition 
to a sentence, an idiom confined to 1 Timothy ii. 6 and two 
earlier passages of St. Paul. Most remarkable of all, per- 
haps, is the order Christ Jesus (according to the critical 
texts) in which our Saviour's name is written wherever His 
official character or His present rule over His servants or 
relation to them is in the writer's mind. The distinction 
between Jesus Christ (historical) and Christ Jesus (official) 
has never been observed by any other Christian writer with 
the same instinctive care and delicacy as by St. Paul. 1 

Now, the appearance of new and disappearance of older 
forms of speech are accountable in the later compositions 
of a versatile writer. But the persistence in these epistles 
of so many Pauline idiosyncrasies, and these of so varied a 



1 See on this subject a valuable essay by the late revered Benjamin 
Hellier on " The Pauline Usage of the Names of Christ," in the Theo- 
logical Monthly for February, April, and July, 1890. Mr. Hellier 
finds that this criterion tells decisively in favour of the Pauline author- 
ship of the Pastorals, but against that of the epistle to the Hebrews. 



THE AFOSTLE PAUL. 



character as we have shown them to be, sporadic in their 
occurrence and inwoven into the entire texture of thought 
and speech, is only consistent with one assumption — namely, 
that their titular is also their actual author, and that the 
word Paul, with which they each begin, is the honest truth. 

III. Personal Data of the Pastorals. 

In the case of 2 Timothy the references to person and 
place are so multiplied (more numerous, in fact, than in 
any other epistle except Romans) and wear so genuine an 
aspect, that they have secured in its favour the verdict of 
many critics, including Schleiermacher, Bleek, Neander, 
Ritschl, and finally Reuss (formerly accepting all three), who 
reject one or both of its comrades. Others, such as Ewald, 
Renan, Hausrath, Hitzig, Pfleiderer, Sabatier, are inclined 
to see in these circumstantial notices (2 Tim. i. 15-18 ; iv. 
9-21 ; also Tit. iii. 12-15) fragments of one or more lost 
letters of the apostle. Holtzmann, following Baur, declines 
all theories of partial authenticity (pp. 1 19-126) ; he regards 
these verses as concocted for the express purpose of giving a 
colour to documents wholly spurious and supposititious. 
This is, at least, consistent. The three epistles must stand 
or fall together, and in their integrity ; they are of one 
piece and texture. If the genuineness of 2 Timothy is 
certified by circumstantial evidence, the reason is gone for 
impugning the rest ; for their dialect, and the ecclesiastical 
situation they suppose, are already proved to be Pauline. 
Let us review these passages, and see if they do not com- 
mend themselves and the documents to which they belong. 
The mention of the Asiatic party " of whom is Phygelus 
and Hermogenes" (2 Tim. i. 15), serves as a motive for 
Timothy to "guard the good deposit" (ver. 14; comp. 
chap. ii. 1,2); and the desertion of these men in turn reminds 
Paul of the contrasted behaviour of Onesiphorus (vers. 16-18). 
This parenthesis (vers. 15-18) enforces the need for courage 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 363 



and faithfulness on Timothy's part, and for the choice of 
a succession of " faithful men " as teachers in the Church. 
It cannot be detached from the context. 

The tidings and messages concluding the letter are the 
most miscellaneous of the kind in Paul's correspondence. 
They are thrown out with the unstudied freedom natural 
when the heart is full and there are many things to say, 
and perhaps little time to say them. Renan's phrase, 
" conversation stenographed," exactly describes 2 Timothy 
iv. 9-21. The repeated " Come quickly " of Paul's yearning 
heart (vers. 9, 21) is put down by Holtzmann (p. 62), as 
in Titus hi. 12, to the " tendency " of the writer, who is 
anxious that Timothy and Titus " should not seem too 
independent by the side of the apostle ! " — a pitiful ex- 
ample of the Tubingen method. — The allusion to the 
despatch of "Titus to Dalmatia" in 2 Timothy iv. 10 agrees 
with the summons previously given him in Titus iii. 12 
" to Nicopolis," lying in the same direction. — The apostle 
wishes to have Mark by his side, as well as Timothy 
himself (ver. 11); and this surely suggests his saying, 
"Tychicus have I sent 1 to Ephesus" (ver. 12); he is not 
forgetting that Timothy is there, 2 but intimates that Ephesus 
would not be left without oversight (comp. Tit. iii. 12). 
We know from Colossians iv. 10 that Mark had recovered 
St. Paul's esteem, forfeited by the conduct related in Acts 
xiii. 13, and was with him during the former imprisonment 
at Rome, where he had doubtless shown himself " use- 
ful for service " ; and, moreover, that he was then about 
to set out for Asia— whence Paul now desires to recall 
him. — The "cloak" and "books" (ver. 13), we presume, 
were " left at Troas with Carpus " on St. Paul's last 



1 " Sent " probably with this very letter. ' AireiTeiXa we may take 
to be epistolary aoiist, written from the reader's standpoint, as in 
Col. iv. 8. 

2 So we learn from ver. 19, if not from the general tenor of the 
letter, in its connexion with 1 Timothy. 



>64 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



journey to Macedonia (i Tim. i. 3), which found an un- 
expected terminus in the prison at Rome. The Tendency 
critics are sadly at a loss to account for the manufacture 
by the pseudo-Paul of these articles. The thought of the 
coming "winter" (ver. 21) reminds the imprisoned man 
of his old cloak ; and in his solitude he craves the com- 
panionship of books. — " Alexander the coppersmith " (vers. 
14, 15) forms a link between the apostle's directions to 
Timothy (vers. 9-13), and the account of his own position 
he is about to give in vers. 16-18. This man had borne 
witness, directly or indirectly, against Paul at Rome, and 
this was not the first injury suffered from him : was it 
through his machinations that the apostle's renewed im- 
prisonment had come about ? Timothy, in starting for 
Rome, is warned against his plots. —The satisfaction St. 
Paul feels in having proclaimed his great message on the 
occasion of his defence before the Emperor's tribunal (ver. 
17) is in keeping with what he intimates in Romans i. 8, 
14-16 (comp. Acts xxiii. 11) touching the importance that, 
in his judgment, belonged to the imperial city as a centre 
for Gentile Christianity. This opportunity was, in truth, 
the climax of the apostle's mission to the heathen (Acts ix. 
15; xxvii. 24). Ver. 18 signifies that his present deliver- 
ance is but a respite, perhaps for a few months (ver. 21), 
leaving no doubt in his mind as to the final issue ; it is 
" into Christ's heavenly kingdom " that Paul now looks to be 
" saved." — Perhaps the salutation to " the house of Onesi- 
phorus " (ver. 19 ; comp. chap. i. 16) recalls to the writer's 
mind " Erastus " and " Trophimus " (ver. 20), who had failed 
to render him the service expected from them. One is 
surprised, however, that Timothy should be told of what 
had occurred "at Miletus," but a few miles distant from 
Ephesus, months before this time. Possibly the apostle 
at this point is talking to himself rather than to Timothy ; 
he drops into soliloquy. We have met before with Erastus 
and Trophimus in Timothy's company (Acts xix. 22 ; xx. 4 : 
not the Erastus of Romans xvi. 23), 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 365 

The names of those who greet Timothy from Rome bear 
the marks of authenticity. They are new to the epistles ; 
two of them are Greek, two Latin names. " Linus " 
appears in the list of the first bishops of Rome. 

Twenty-three members of the apostolic Church are men- 
tioned in this letter ; eleven of them for the first and last 
time in the New Testament. In the cases of the other 
twelve, there is nothing at variance with, nor anything 
repeated from, what we learn elsewhere about the persons 
referred to, but much that agrees with it, and in unexpected 
ways. 

Towards Timothy and Titus, some of the critics say, 
Paul is made to assume a domineering attitude, lecturing 
and "scolding" Timothy, forsooth, as if he were "a raw 
catechumen " ! This is grossly exaggerated. What we do 
see is the apostolic dignity, softened by a tender sympathy 
and blended in Timothy's case with apprehension, with 
which St. Paul, in the presence of the Church, charges his 
representatives placed in circumstances of grave responsi- 
bility and peril. He addresses Timothy, his helper for 
many years, as a young man (1 Tim. iv. 12 ; 2 Tim. ii. 22 ; 
comp. Tit. ii. 15); but when these letters were written 
Timothy had scarcely passed his thirtieth year, and he was 
set over the eldership of Ephesus. He was of a nature 
apt to retain its youth ; and to old men those of the next 
generation always seem young. 

On the whole, it does not appear that Timothy's charac- 
ter had matured in the way we might have hoped. He was 
not prepared to be thrown on his own resources. The 
youthful timidity hinted at in 1 Corinthians xvi. 10, n he 
had not sufficiently outgrown ; the repeated exhortations 
to courage and endurance addressed to him in the second 
epistle imply some failure in this respect. With this was 
connected a want of firmness, a pliability and accessibility 
to private influences, against which he needed to be cau- 
tioned (1 Tim. v. 19, 22). We imagine there was some- 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



thing recluse and contemplative in his disposition, tending 
to abstract him from public and practical duties (i Tim. iv. 
1 1-16) ; and associated with this a touch of asceticism, which 
made him weaker to resist the very temptations he most 
shunned (1 Tim. v. 22, 23). And we suspect that Hofmann 
is right in inferring from 1 Timothy vi. 3-12, that the young 
minister was sometimes inclined in his weariness and de- 
spondency to envy the easy, gainful life which false teachers 
were pursuing under his eyes. 

In fact, Timothy's was a fine, but not a robust nature ; 
liable to suffer from an uncongenial atmosphere, and ill- 
framed for conflict and leadership, with more of the ivy in 
its composition than the oak. St. Paul found in him the 
complement of his own bold and active temperament, as 
Peter did in John, and Luther in Melanchthon. In the 
apostle's company Timothy had shown admirable devotion 
and steadfastness (Phil. ii. 19-23). But he drooped alone. 
Separated so long from his leader, amid surroundings trying 
in the last degree to his sensitive disposition and delicate 
frame, his faith and his character were severely strained. 
The "tears" with which he parted from the apostle (2 Tim. 
i. 4) and his reluctance to be left longer at Ephesus (1 Tim. 
i. 3) were due not merely to his love for his father in 
Christ, but to the peculiar difficulty to him of the work laid 
upon him. The portrait which these letters give us of 
young Timothy is consistent and life-like, and it harmonizes 
well with the slighter traits preserved in the other epistles 
and the Acts of the Apostles. 

A plausible objection to 1 Timothy lies in the fact that 
when he wrote this letter, St. Paul, it appears, had very re- 
cently left Timothy behind at Ephesus, after himself paying 
a visit to the city (chap. i. 3). What need, then, for these 
detailed and reiterated advices, about matters, too, which, 
one would have thought, the apostle might have arranged 
himself when he was on the spot ? Our answer is that, in 
all probability, Paul had not been at Ephesus at this time. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 367 

11 The words of 1 Timothy i. 3 only say that Paul wished 
Timothy to stay at Ephesus where he then was, while he 
himself went on to Macedonia" (Hofmann). lipocrfxdvai 
means to remain still, to stay on (Acts xviii. 18), not to re- 
main behind^ which is v-ojxiveiv (Acts xvii. 14) or might have 
been expressed as in Titus i. 5. And Tropevo/xevos may signify 
011 my way, in the course of my journey to Macedonia, just 
as well as setting out to Macedonia (see Acts xxi. 6). The 
apostle was bound for Macedonia, and could not afford to 
turn aside to Ephesus ; l for this very reason he desired 
Timothy to continue his sojourn there, in order to carry out 
instructions already given in brief, and which he now com- 
municates at length. The incident of Acts xx. 17 ("from 
Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the 
Church ") seems to have repeated itself, perhaps at the same 
spot (comp. 2 Tim. iv. 20) ; only Paul is now travelling in the 
opposite direction (chap. iv. 13, 20), 2 and summons Timothy 

1 Another reason suggests itself for St. Paul's giving Ephesus the go- 
by. His first ministry there ended in a great popular tumult. He had 
made powerful and bitter enemies in the city, and left it shaken both 
in mind and body and in peril of his life (comix 2 Cor. i. 8-10 with 
1 Cor. xv. 32 and Acts xix.). It was "the Jews from Asia" who began 
the murderous assault upon him afterwards in Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 27) ; 
and "Alexander the coppersmith," in all likelihood the Jewish leader 
whom his countrymen put forward in the Ephesian not (Acts xix. 
33), about this time did the apostle "much evil." Paul sought help 
from his friends "in Asia" (2 Tim. i. 15 ; comp. Acts xix. 30, 31) — ■ 
probably rebutting evidence ; and it was refused (through the influence 
of his opponents tnere?). All this goes to show that Ephesus was a mo^t 
dangerous place for St. Paul, and that he had good reason for the sorrow- 
ful anticipation of Acts xx. 25. His relation to Ephesus was something 
like that to Thessalonica long before, when he " would fain have come 
once and again ; but Satan hindered." 

2 It is evident that the three Pastoral Epistles were written in quick 
succession, and that the events connected with them marched rapidly. 
The course of Paul's movements, in our view, was something like this : 
He sailed from Crete (calling there, perhaps, on his way East from 
Spain), where he left Titus ; then coasted along the Asiatic shore, call- 
ing at Miletus and Troas amongst other places ; wrote to Timothy from 
Macedonia, shortly afterwards to Titus; then proceeded to Corinth, and 
was arrested and hurried to Rome during the summer, before he reached 
Nicopolis. The journey to the East proposed in Phil. ii. 24 and Phile- 
mon 22 was accomplished, we imagine, before the mission to Spain. 



3 68 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



(not the body of the elders) from Ephesus for an interview, 1 
at the end of which his young helper, tearful (chap. i. 4) and 
reluctant ("I exhorted thee"), returns to his station, and 
the apostle pursues his journey, promising to send Timothy 
a full letter of instructions -based on the representations his 
assistant had made to him touching the condition of things 
in the Ephesian Church. Such a letter we have in the first 
epistle to Timothy. Since Paul and Timothy had met so 
recently, there would be no need for inserting anything in 
the shape of news or private messages. All that remained 
to be said was of an official character, and pertained to the 
public conduct of Timothy's ministry at Ephesus. 

If our view of the order of things be correct, then St. 
Paul's presentiment of six or seven years ago, that the 
Ephesians would " see his face no more" (Acts xx. 25) was 
verified. He still " hopes to come " (1 Tim. iii. 14 ; iv. 13), 
but with no certainty ; and we gather from the silence of the 
second letter that he had failed to do so, and Timothy had 
still to remain month after month at his unwelcome post, 
without sight of his dear master and enduring the hope 
deferred which " maketh the heart sick." The service of 
Onesiphorus to the apostle "in Ephesus" (2 Tim. i. 18) 
may just as well have been rendered to him during his 
former long residence there. His repulse by " all those in 
Asia," and the " evil " done him by Alexander, related pro- 
bably to his trial now in process at Rome, when unfavour- 
able evidence was given by the latter and favourable evidence 
withheld by the former (chap. i. 15 ; iv. 14-16). The sentence 
against " Hymenals and Alexander" (1 Tim. i. 20) — not 
the Alexander of 2 Timothy iv. 14 — could have been pro- 



1 Hofmann does not suppose an interview necessary (pp. 66, 67). 
He thinks the " exhortation " of I Tim. i. 3 was made by letter ; and 
that the "tears" of 2 Tim. i. 4 were ivcpt by letter in return [brieflich 
geweittt) —a conceit by which he compromises an otherwise strong posi- 
tion. There is no need for the apostle in either epistle to refer further 
to the circumstances of his meeting with Timothy. A meeting sovie- 
where there clearly had been 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 369 



nounced from a distance, like that against the Corinthian 
offender (1 Cor. v. 3-5). None of these allusions compel 
us to suppose that Paul had himself been recently in 
Ephesus. 

Against the authenticity of 2 Timothy it is contended 
that the exhortations of chap. ii. i-iv. 6 are inconsistent 
with the " speedy " coming to Rome which Paul urges on 
his friend. But it will be observed that these directions arc 
much less specific than those previously given in the first 
epistle, and bear on Timothy's own spirit and character 
rather than his administrative duties; also that his "doing 
his diligence to come before winter " does not exclude — it 
rather implies — uncertainty and causes of delay. Especially 
we must bear in mind that the apostle knew his end to 
be near, and feared that this might be his last message to 
his "dear child Timothy" (2 Tim. iv. 5, 6). 

A similar objection is brought against the epistle to Titus, 
grounded on chap. iii. 12, and much the same reply may 
be made. In this case it will be noticed that Paul expressly 
provides for the continuance of Titus' mission by " Artemas, 
or Tychicus " ; in which event, we may presume, Titus would 
hand over the instructions now received to the brother who 
relieved him. 

We have finally to consider the light in which Paul him- 
self appears in these epistles. Why, it is asked, should he 
write to his old assistants and familiars, his " true children " 
in the faith, with so much stiffness and formality and such 
an air of authority, so that the greeting to Titus, for 
example, is only surpassed by that of the epistle to the 
Romans in its solemnity and rhetorical fulness ? The 
answer lies partly in the fact that these epistles, especially 
1 Timothy and Titus, are " open," or quasi-public letters, 
written with the Churches of Ephesus and Crete in view, 
and such as it would be suitable to read, in part at least, 
at their assemblies. The case of Philemon is quite dif- 
ferent. And the apostle writes, above all in 2 Timothy, 

24 



370 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



under the sense that " the time of his departure is at 
hand." His words have the grave and pathetic dignity of 
a valedictory address to his successors in the ministry 
of Christ. 

The critics find something of exaggeration and " extreme 
rhetoric" in the allusions of i Timothy i. 12-17 to Paul's 
earlier life. But these references are in keeping with 1 
Corinthians xv. 9 and Ephesians iii. 8. The ardent grati- 
tude and profound self-abasement before the sovereignty 
of Divine grace which animated the apostle throughout his 
ministry naturally, come to their fullest expression in his 
closing years. We catch in these words the very beating 
of St. Paul's heart. Nemo potest Paulinum pectus effingerc 
(Erasmus). To treat them as the cold and crafty invention 
of a forger is little short of sacrilege. It is said that there 
is an egotism in the letters, a fondness for reverting to 
his own history and making himself a model for others, 
unlike the genuine Paul. (See however, 1 Thess. ii. 1, 2; 



1 Cor. 



-6; 



XI. 



1 ; Gal. iv. 11-20, etc.) 
This feature of the Pastorals is, to our mind, one of the 
subtlest traits of reality. How naturally the old man's mind 
turns to the days of his youth ! His memory lingers over 
the past. He delights to dwell on the great trust that God 
first committed to him, and which must so soon pass into 
the hands of others. It is truly affecting thus to see the 
old warrior " fight his battles o'er again," and to note the 
simple-hearted joy with which he draws from his own trials 
and triumphs encouragements for the fearful Timothy. 
His references to the family and childhood of Timothy 
further show how much the aged apostle's mind is living 
in the past (2 Tim. i. 5 ; iii. 14, 15). 

The beauty of St. Paul's " swan-song," in 2 Timothy iv. 
6-8, should have raised it for ever above critical mistrust. 
No passage in his epistles is more finely touched with 
the apostle's genius. It has the Hebraistic rhythm of all 
his more exalted utterances. It echoes earlier sayings, but 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 371 



without repetition. It is the cup of a deep spring filled to 
the brim with Paul's finest thought and tenderest feeling, 
expressed with a serenity which came to his strenuous 
nature only at rare moments, and speaks of a heart at ease 
within itself and that knows its labour ended and its storms 
gone by. These verses have an ideal fitness as the apostle's 
final record and pronouncement upon his own career. 
They put the seal of their faithful testimony on the earthly 
conflicts and toils of Christ's servant, crowned already with 
the earnest of the crown that awaits him from the hand of 
his Saviour and Judge. Nor has Christian faith since found 
any higher expression of its sense of victory in the presence 
of the last enemy. 

The concluding line, in which the apostle claims this 
orown for " all," with himself, <: who have loved the Lord's 
appearing," breathes the essence of the Pauline spirit. It 
was exactly like him to say this at the summit of his glad- 
ness and hope, whose life was a sacrifice to the Church of 
God and his glory and crown of rejoicing in the consummate 
salvation of his brethren in Christ. He invites us to share 
his own perfected fellowship in the joy of our Lord. We 
accept the token and hold it fast, knowing from whom we 
have received it. 

We have now completed our examination of the language 
ef the disputed epistles, and the circumstantial evidence 
for their origin which they themselves supply. However 
defective the inquiry, and open to objection in the details 
of interpretation, we venture to think that it furnishes suffi- 
cient proof that the canonical epistles to Timothy and 
Titus are the work of the apostle Paul, and that the early 
Church was justified in accepting these three letters in the 
name which they bore, and incorporating them with the 
other ten epistles upon the same footing of unquestioned 
authority. Neither in the style of the writings, nor in the 
tenor of their personal allusions, is there adequate ground 



372 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

it seems to us, for the serious and long-sustained suspicions 
which exist against them. It is in the subject-matter of the 
epistles, in the nature of their theological and ecclesiastical 
contents, that these doubts have their motive and their real 
basis. Holtzmann is almost alone among his associates in 
seeking to ground his theory on a proper linguistic analysis 
of the documents. For the most part the Tendency critics 
take it as a thing self-evident and beyond the need of 
proof, that the heretics condemned in the Pastorals were 
Gnostics of the second century ; and their interpretation pro- 
ceeds on this assumption. 

The closing sentences of Dr. Pneiderer's account of the 
epistles, given in his Urchristenthum, exhibit very clearly 
the point of view from which the school he represents regard 
these writings, and the path by which they have arrived at 
their conclusions : — 

"The Pastoral Epistles, especially the latest of them, the so-called 
First to limothy — pave the way for that development of episcopacy 
in the Church which we find completed in the Ignatian Letters ; and 
it is in this very purpose of helping to victory the idea of the episco- 
pate as an apostolic institution, that we discover, side by side with 
the polemic against Gnostic heresy, the second main object of these 
epistles. In reality, these two objects are one and the same. . . . 
From the necessity that the Church should assert herself against the 
heretics there came about, on the one hand, the authentication of tradi- 
tion in the form of ecclesiastical dogma, and on the other, the apostolic 
authorization of the episcopacy — ecclesiastical hit rarchy : the latter 
being the practical embodiment of the former, the former the ideal 
ground of the latter. 

"Now, in order to vindicate the doctrine and constitution of the 
Church effectually against heresy, they must above all things be based 
on apostolic tradition and authority ; and the interests of the Church 
imperatively required that the advocate of the principle of authority 
should publish his warnings and injunctions in the name of that apostle 
who was held in chief — indeed, on this point, in sole esteem and defer- 
ence,— that is to say, in the name of Paul. Strange indeed, and tragical, 
that the apostle of freedom has at last been enlisted as voucher for the 
principle of authority, and founder of the hierarchy ! But if there 
is any one to blame for this perversion, it must be no other than 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 



Marcion, who by his ultra- Paulinism forced the men of order and sound 
reason ' into this awkward position !" (pp. 822, 823.) 

With Pfleiderer at present, as with Baur fifty years ago, 
the deductions of this school against the authenticity of so 
many New Testament writings rest upon their d priori 
construction of the history of the primitive Church. That 
construction has been remodelled in Pfleiderer's hands ; but 
in principle and method it remains the same as when first 
laid down by Baur. 

No judgment, however, that we might form respecting the 
system of doctrine and Church organization indicated in 
these epistles, whether favourable or adverse to authenticity, 
ought to be regarded as in itself decisive upon this point. 
The data for such a judgment must be gathered from an 
unprejudiced examination of the documents ; and they are 
themselves contingent on a multitude of questions of 
language and circumstantial detail, which need to be first 
carefully considered. The literary character of the epistles, 
and the personal and local references they contain, along 
with the external attestation to their origin, supply the proof 
of authorship in the first instance. It is enough if the ideas 
contained in the letters are in no way contradictory to the 
presumption already established. At the same time, our 
inquiry into their governing ideas and aims will, as we hope, 
serve more than a merely defensive and negative purpose. 
We shall strive to show, what is at least manifest to our- 
selves, that the teaching of the Pastoral epistles and the 
life of the Church as therein disclosed stand in an intimate, 
genetic connexion with that which the previous and ac- 
knowledged epistles of St. Paul present to us. 



1 This explanation, if it were true, throws a sad light on the character 
or " the men of order and sound reason" in the Church of the second 
century. It puts the Pastoral epistles on a level with the pseudo- 
Isidorian decretals. Any forger could plead as good an excuse. 



374 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



IV. The Doctrinal Characteristics. 

In reviewing the doctrine of the Pastorals, we take for our 
starting point the following sentence of Holtzmann (p. 159) : 

" The general basis of ideas is unquestionably Pauline. It is no 
other doctrine than that of Paul which these writings profess and 
seek to expound. But the bare and impoverished form of this repre- 
sentation betrays its unauthenticity. Paul's doctrinal conceptions are 
weakened and brought down to the level of a later age. We have 
before us a diluted Paulinism, accommodated to the demands of an 
advanced stage of Church life, ecclesiastically modified and stereotyped, 
and which has come to terms with Jewish Christianity, the Paulinist 
and Legalist parties being at length compelled to join hands under the 
pressure of Gnostic and heretical assaults." 

So far as this " impoverishment " of the true Paulinism is 
matter of expression, we have discussed it already (pp. 357, 
358). As a description of the theological character 
of the epistles, there is a modicum of truth involved in 
Holtzmann's depreciatory estimate. St. Paul's character- 
istic doctrines do not here assume the commanding promi- 
nence given to them in the major epistles ; they are not 
thrown into the same bold relief, nor developed with the 
lame logical completeness. But then this observation 
applies equally to his earliest writings — the two epistles to 
the Thessalonians. When those former letters were written, 
the Legalist controversy, which occupied the central period 
of Paul's apostleship and called forth the mightiest efforts 
of his genius, had not yet arisen ; by this time it had to 
a large extent subsided. The doctrines of salvation are 
quietly assumed, where before they were vehemently argued 
and defended. For they constitute, in the view alike of 
writer and readers, a conquest securely won, a foundation 
enduringly laid. But in this matter-of-fact assumption they 
lose nothing of their cardinal importance. The sentences 
in which they are affirmed serve to re-state, with axiomatic 
weight and precision, that Gospel which is to Paul and his 
sons in the faith a fundamental certainty (.see 1 Tim. ii. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 375 



4-6; iii. 15, 16; 2 Tim. i. 9, 10). The Tendency critics 
are untrue to their own principle of evolution when they 
assume that the mind of Paul stood still, that he could 
write nothing but letters after the manner of Romans and 
Galatians, and when they insist upon our taking these great 
works as in style and proportion and theological purport 
the sole test of what is Pauline. 

Most of all do the doctrinal passages of the epistle to 
Titus (i. 1-4; ii. 10-14; i»- 3~7) protest against the dis- 
paragement that the Pastorals contain a half-effaced and 
diluted Paulinism. These luminous apercus of the method 
of re'demption carry it backward to the Divine causation 
— " which God, who cannot lie, promised before times 
eternal" — and forward to its moral operation, and its issues 
in the life beyond ; while they describe in full and glowing 
language the agency by which the work of man's renewal is 
brought about : 

"We were senseless, disobedient, wandering, enslaved to manifold 
lusts and pleasures. But when the kindness and philanthropy of God 
our Saviour appeared — not by works done in righteousness, which we 
had wrought, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the 
washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit, which 
He poured on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, that being 
justified by His grace, we mi^ht be made heirs according to the hope 
of eternal life." 

There is no sign of poverty, or of laboured imitation, in 
a mind whose wealth runs over in this way. Here there is 
drawn for us, in a mere incidental passage, by a few rapid 
strokes of the pen, a picture of the whole Gospel in 
miniature. The sayings of the Pastoral Epistles bring the 
doctrines of grace to a rounded fulness and chastened ripe- 
ness of expression, that warrant us in seeing in them the 
authentic conclusion of the Pauline gospel of salvation in 
the mind which first conceived it. 

It is impossible, within moderate limits, to discuss all the 
points in which Holtzmann detects a difference between 
the teaching of the Pastorals and that of the genuine 



■76 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



epistles* We will deal with the most considerable of the 
alleged discrepancies, and those which alone raise any 
serious difficulty: (i) Amongst the chief is that touching 
the nature of God. The Divine character and agency are 
set forth under appellations new to us in St. Paul, and 
some of them unique. He is the " King of the ages, 
incorruptible, invisible, the only God " ; " the blessed and 
only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords, 
who alone hath immortality, dwelling in light unap- 
proachable, whom none of men hath seen, nor can see" 
(i Tim. i. 17; vi. 15, 16); "the living God, who is 
Saviour of all men," and "gives life to all things " (1 Tim. 
iv. 10; vi. 13). Six times does the expression "God (our) 
Saviour " recur in these epistles, found but twice besides in 
the New Testament (Luke i. 47 ; Jude 26). 

The emphasis thus laid on the Divine absoluteness ha 
manifestly a polemical intention. But it is not necessary to 
go to the second century for its explanation. The clue lies 
nearer to our hand. We find it in the false dualism, current 
amongst Hellenistic Jews in St. Paul's time, which separated 
God from the world and treated the material creation as 
the work of inferior and intermediate beings. This system 
of theosophy, the daughter of Platonism and mother of 
Gnosticism, the apostle has already combated in his epistle 
to the Colossians, dealing with it there chiefly in its bearing 
on the Person and work of Christ. Philo of Alexandria, 
Paul's contemporary, was the chief exponent of this doc- 
trine on Jewish ground. He represents what we may call 
the Broad Church of Judaism, whose influence inevitably 
made itself felt amongst Pauline Christians at a very early 
time. Indeed Gnosticism, as Dr. Jowett aptly says, 1 might 
be described as " the mental atmosphere of the Greek cities 
of Asia, a conducting medium between heathenism and 
Christianity " ; perhaps we might say, a common solvent 



1 Commentary on 1 Thessalonians, second edition, p. 94. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 577 



of heathenism, Judaism, and Christianity. It limited the 
Divine prerogatives, confining the supreme God, under a 
false notion of reverence, to a purely spiritual and transcen- 
dental region. Hence God is here acknowledged as wield- 
ing in unshared dominion all creaturely and earthly powers, 
while in His own nature and blessedness He holds a realm 
of light inaccessible and life undecaying. 

The dualism of the earliest Gnostics, or Gnosticizing 
Judaists, is reproved in its ascetic consequences in i Timothy 
iv. 3-5, where marriage and physical sustenance are vindi- 
cated as things of the Divine order — " sanctified by the 
word of God and prayer " (compare, and contrast Col. ii. 
20-23). But the writer condemns the false spiritualism of 
the coming " latter times " in no other strain than we should 
expect from the Paul of 1 Corinthians, who had said, "To 
us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things 
and we for Him " — whose is " earth and its fulness " ; and 
who again has written, " The woman is of the man, and the 
man through the woman ; but all things of God.'' 

The work of grace is placed with emphasis in the hands 
of God, in the interests of the Divine unit}', and in tacit 
contradiction to those who "professing"' above others "to 
know God," yet barred Him out from contact with human 
life, and so robbed Him of the honours of salvation. At 
the same time, the expression has an intrinsic fitness. The 
apostle's theology proper, his doctrine of God, resumes and 
absorbs his soteriology. His system of thought anticipates 
the goal marked out for the course of redemption — when 
" God shall be all in all " (1 Cor. xv. 28). See p. 338. 

(2) " The image of Christ presented in the Pastorals is 
indeed composed of Pauline formulae, but it is lacking in 
the Pauline spirit and feeling, in the mystic inwardness, the 
religious depth and moral force that live in the Christ of 
Paul." So says Schenkel, quoted by Holtzmann with 
approval (pp. 166, 167). Of the justice of this stricture 
every one will form his own estimate. It appeals not to 



37S THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

the critical expert, but to the feeling and discernment of 
the devout Christian reader. For ourselves, we find no 
defect, either of depth or force, in such a sentence as 
i Timothy ii. 5, 6, with its conception of the "one mediator 
between God and men, Christ Jesus, who is man ; who 
gave Himself a ransom for all — the testimony to be borne 
in its own time ; " which, moreover, is precisely ?iot " com- 
posed of Pauline formulae," for Christ is here called mediator 
for the first time (comp. Heb. viii. 6, etc). Nor are his 
mysticism and religious depth at all to seek in 1 Timothy iii. 
15, 16 (the " mystery of godliness, He who was manifested 
in the flesh," etc.). The expression " in Christ Jesus," 
almost peculiar to Paul, and which carries with it all the 
inwardness and .depth of his sense of the believer's relation 
to his Lord, is employed seven times in the two letters to 
Timothy in application to Christian acts and states. 

It is said that the emphasis thrown upon the Divine 
" manifestation " and the " appearing " (eVt^aveia) of Christ 
(1 Tim. iii. 16 ; 2 Tim. i. 10 ; Tit. ii. 13; iii. 4) "is a sign 
of later Gnostic influence." But in 1 and 2 Thessalonians 
similar language is used of the second advent of Christ ; 
and in 2 Corinthians iv. 4, 6, touching His first appearance. 
These expressions, in truth, reflect the glory of the Divine 
manifestation of Jesus made to Saul on the Damascus road. 
In a form of like splendour Paul pictures to himself the 
Saviour's reappearance. It is the Gnostics who have 
borrowed their language from our New Testament writings 
— not the latter from the former. 

The Parousia forms a significant link between the earliest 
and latest of the apostle's letters. It is, in a sense, his Alpha 
and Omega. But a change has supervened in his view of 
the event. It is still to him, and more than ever, " that 
blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and 
Saviour Jesus Christ " (Tit. ii. 13) ; but he no longer speaks 
of it in the terms of personal anticipation that we find in 
1 Thessalonians and t Corinthians xv. For he has recon- 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 



ciled himself, as already in 2 Corinthians v., to the fact that 
he must pass away by death before the Lord's return. He 
rejoices to feel that " the time of his departure is come ' 
(2 Tim. iv. 6). He has learnt increasingly to see in the 
inward victories of the Christian life and the "earnest of 
the Spirit in our hearts " (Rom. viii. n-23 ; Eph. i. 13, 14) 
the pledge of the believer's final glorification. Though 
the Parousia ceases to occupy the immediate foreground of 
the apostle's outlook, it is no less certainly in prospect, and 
has become a vision yet more splendid to the eyes of his 
heart. Meanwhile, the intervening future grows more 
distinct, in its darker as well as its brighter aspects. " Evil 
men and impostors will wax worse and worse, deceiving 
and being deceived"' (2 Tim. iii. 13). The second coming 
" furnishes the shining background for the gloomy picture 
of the troublous last times " (Holtzmann, p. 188 ; see 1 Tim. 
v. 1 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1 : iv. 3, 4). In all directions the horizon 
is threatening, and the air thick with the sense of coming 
trouble. The predictions of these epistles only give greater 
distinctness to forebodings already expressed by Paul in 
Acts xx. 29-31, and elsewhere. 

On the other hand, their representations of present or 
impending conflict differ, both in colouring and proportion, 
from any picture furnished by the age of Marcion and 
Justin Martyr. It is superfluous to discuss the identifica- 
tions offered to us ; for they contradict each other, and 
every new critic fixes on a type of Gnosticism different from 
the last. Holtzmann and Pfleiderer themselves so far fail 
in the attempt, that they are compelled to assume an 
artificial infusion into the supposed polemic against Mar- 
cionite heresy of elements drawn from St. Paul's time, such 
as would have made the attack confused and ineffective for 
the end for which they imagine it designed. 

When "Christ Jesus" appears in 1 Timothy v. 21 (comp. 
2 Tim. iv. 1) accompanied by "the elect angels," it is 
because He is thought of as in 2 Thessalonians i. 7 (comp 



380 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Luke ix. 26) as the future Judge of men. The connexion 
of thought resembles that of 2 Corinthians v. 10, 11, where 
the sense of his present " manifestation to God " carries the 
apostle's mind onward to the scene of his future appearance 
at " the tribunal of Christ." 

In these latest epistles, the eschatology of the earliest 
reappears, viewed however through a longer perspective, and 
enriched by the deeper Christology of the intervening letters. 

(3) In regard to the writer's attitude toward the great 
Pauline antithesis of law and grace, the crucial text is 
1 Timothy i. 8-1 1 : — 

"We know that the law is good, if one use it lawfully. . . . 
Law is not imposed for a righteous man, but for the lawless, etc., 
. . . and whatsoever else is contrary to the sound teaching, accord- 
ing to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, with which I was 
entrusted." 

This passage, as Holtzmann allows, belongs to " the 
writer's general standpoint," and cannot be dismissed as a 
mere polemical stroke against the Marcionites (p. 160). 
But the standpoint is that of Paul himself, the same which 
he asserted in Romans and Galatians. The " lawful use " 
of the law consists in its giving " the knowledge of sin," 
by " making the offence to abound " and so " working out 
wrath." It was added "for the sake of transgressions." 
Hence it is designed " for the lawless and unruly " — to 
mark and condemn them as such ; while the truly "righteous 
man" is "not under law, but under grace." This is "ac- 
cording to the gospel " of Paul's great evangelical epistles ; 
and " knowing " it, Timothy will know how to " use the 
law," not in Jewish fashion as a yoke for the saint, but as 
a whip for the sinner. This passage negatives at the outset 
Schleiermacher's assertion, that " the author of 1 Timothy 
silently passes over the chief position advanced by Paul 
against the Judaistic standpoint." 

When we read in Titus ii. 14 of Christ's sacrifice as 
" ransoming us from all lawlessness" this complements 



THE TASTORAL EPISTLES. 381 

instead of contradicting St. Paul's earlier watchword of 
redemption "from the curse of the law "(Gal. iii. 10-14); 
for lawlessness, if it does not actually constitute that curse, 
s its cause and concomitant. A redemption saving from 
sin's punishment, but not from sin, is obviously illusive. 
In fact, we are here carried forward, along the line ot 
Romans vi., from the idea of justification as mere acquittal 
to its positive issue in the new law-keeping, but not law- 
subject, life of the believer. In the unique and Paul-like 
compound avTiXyrpou (ransom-price), of 1 Timothy ii. 6, the 
New Testament doctrine of the vicarious sacrifice culminates. 
This word alone is sufficient to make the first epistle to 
Timothy immortal. In vain does Holtzmann speak of the 
death and resurrection of Christ — " these two facts of 
central importance, in Paul's view, for the Christian con- 
sciousness " — as " receiving but cursory reference " (p. 170). 
The three epistles are steeped in their influence. As well 
argue that the author of Galatians thought little of the 
resurrection, because in that letter he happens only once, 
and in passing, to make verbal mention of it ! 

It is more to the purpose when our critic observes (p. 169) 
that in these writings the Church rather than the individual 
is the recipient of the blessings of salvation, and when he 
sees in this a link between the Pastorals and Ephesians 1 
(comp. Tit. ii. 14 with Eph. v. 25-27). The writer's mind 
dwells mainly on the general and collective aspects of the 
Gospel. He is thinking not so much of Him " who loved 
me and gave Himself up for me" as of " the philanthropy 
of God our Saviour." And his repeated assertion of the 
universalism of the Gospel is opposed not, as in Romans iii. 
29, 30, to Jewish exclusiveness of race, but to the Gnosti- 
cizing pride that reserved the knowledge of God to the 
initiated few. This narrow and vain intellectualism was just 

1 Holtzmann, and the school of Baur generally, continue to reject 
this latter with the former as Pauline epistles. Not so, however, 
M. Sabatier ; see pp. 229-234 above. 






THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



now the greatest danger of the Church, sure to be the 
parent of a brood of errors and corruptions \ it struck at 
what is most vital to Christianity, in God's universal grace 
to mankind ; and the apostle's detection of the evil and his 
determined opposition to it were already manifest in the 
epistles of the second group (Col. i. 28 ; ii. 3, 8, 18, 19 ; 
Eph. i. 17, 18 ; iii. 9). 

In this connexion we can better understand the principle 
laid down in 2 Timothy ii. 19-21, that whatever "vessel" 
in the " great house " is "purified from unrighteousness," is 
a " vessel unto honour," being " sanctified " and therefore 
" useful to the Master." For it is holiness of character, not 
mere "knowledge," often "falsely so called," that qualifies 
the vessels of the Lord. Holtzmann, however, can only see 
in this definition " a characteristic complement to Paul's 
notion of Predestination, supplying an ethical content to the 
decretum absolutum" which in Romans is matter of pure 
sovereignty (p. 172). Yet in Romans ix. 22 there is implied 
in the " vessels of wrath fitted for destruction " a like 
ethical content to that found in these ** vessels of dis- 
honour." It is not to the Pastorals that we have first to 
look in order to find St. Paul's doctrine of election balanced 
and safeguarded by the assertion of man's responsibility. 
Nor, on the other hand, is the absoluteness of the Divine 
initiative in the work of salvation at all sacrificed in our 
epistles. God's "purpose and grace " are held forth, in 
opposition to " our works," as the moving cause of re- 
demption (2 Tim. i. 9 ■ Tit. iii. 5) as strongly as in Romans 
or Ephesians, and with an unction and empressement entirely 
Pauline. 

(4) A higher sacramental doctrine than that of the genuine 
Paul is detected in Titus iii. 5 (Holtzmann, p. 172). We 
might agree with the critic on this point, if, with Ellicott and 
others, following the Vulgate, we construed " renewal of the 
Holy Spirit " in dependence upon " laver " (the Greek 
genitive is here ambiguous). But the alternative rendering 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 3S3 

of Bengel, Alford, and Hofmann is decidedly preferable. 
The /aver (washing, A.V.) of regeneration and renewat of 
the Ho/y Spirit are two conjoint though distinct agencies. 
This text echoes our Lord's great dictum on the new birth 
" of water and of the Spirit" (John iii. 5), and makes the 
same distinction between the outward or symbolic and the 
inward and essential means of Divine renewal. So the 
passage brings to a focus what we have already learnt con- 
cerning Baptism from Romans vi. 1-6; Galatians iii. 27; 
Colossians ii. 12; Ephesians v. 26, where it represents and 
gives a name to that entire change in the Christian be- 
liever, of which it is the divinely appointed token. 

There is one rite, however, which we meet here for the 
first time in the Pauline epistles — that of the iaying on of 
hands (1 Tim. iv. 14 ; v. 22 ; 2 Tim. i. 6). It is the means 
of conveying special endowments of grace {charismata), be- 
stowed on individual men to fit them for their special voca- 
tion in the Church. There is nothing new, or foreign to 
St. Paul, in the elements of this conception. The idea of 
the "charism" is perfectly familiar (see Rom. xii. 6, etc.). 
And the Acts of the Apostles shows (viii. 17-19, etc.) that 
this form of ordination— an ancient and expressive Jewish 
custom — belonged to the earliest times of the Church. 
That no magical efficacy is attributed to the rite is evident 
from the words of the epistles : " The charism that is in 
thee, . . . given thee through prophecy, with laying 
on of the presbytery's hands " • again, " the charism of 
God that is in thee, through the laying on of my hands." 
The essence of the matter does not lie in the particular 
official hands that ministered in Timothy's ordination ; but 
the grace was God's immediate and inward bestowment, 
attested by the voice of His Spirit in the Church, then 
sealed and acknowledged on the Church's part in the ap- 
propriate form. 

These writings are also said to teach a higher doctrine of 
inspiration than is found in the undisputed epistles. Baur 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



discovered in 2 Timothy iii. 14-17 a covert attack on Mar- 
cion (who rejected the Old Testament), and an attempt to 
rehabilitate the Law in the face of second-century Gnosti- 
cism. " The sacred writings" it is said, " are silently 
contrasted with the oral traditions current in the Gnostic 
sects ; and the phrase ' all Scripture ' protests against the 
arbitrary use made by heretics of certain parts of it." 
Granting the correctness of this interpretation, it is quite 
appropriate to the apostle's time. Theorists such as the 
false teachers of Colossse were sure to neglect the practical 
and moral parts of Scripture. It is the vanity and use- 
lessness of the teaching broached by the men whom 
Timothy and Titus are to oppose that the writer stigma- 
tizes, rather than anything positively false or corrupting 
in it (see 1 Tim. i. 4, 6 ; vi. 3-5; 2 Tim. ii. 16, 23; 
Tit. i. 10-14). In this "vain jangling," however, he sees 
the germ and beginnings of the most fatal moral errors 
(1 Tim. iv. 1-3; 2 Tim. ii. 17, 18; iii. 1-9, 13; iv. 3), 
a mischief of unlimited potency, that " will wax worse 
and worse ; " for this evil Scripture affords the true and 
sufficient remedy. The " fables and endless genealogies," 
" Jewish fables," etc., on which these letters pour contempt, 
were the stock-in-trade of men versed in the allegorical 
method, and who practised a puerile and speculative treat- 
ment of inspired Scripture. So the occasion has come to 
formulate the doctrine of inspiration implicit throughout 
St. Paul's teaching (see specially Rom. xv. 4, and 1 Cor. 
x. 11). That doctrine exhibits in the words "through 
faith that is in Christ Jesus" its specially Pauline stamp and 
character. 

Baur and Holtzmann fail to convince us that the second 
saying of 1 Timothy v. 18 (" The workman is worthy of his 
hire ") is quoted as " Scripture," on a footing with the Old 
Testament, from a written Gospel. Indeed such quotation 
would be scarcely more probable in the middle of the second 
century than in the apostle Paul's own time. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 



(5) The critics note throughout these letters "a retreat 
of the one-sided religious interest of former Pauline 
epistles in favour of a more ethical conception of the purpose 
of life ,} (Holtzmann p. 172). This observation, apart from 
the colouring of censure conveyed in its terms, is true 
enough. Only what Holtzmann calls "a retreat" we should 
describe as an advance. Evangelical doctrine, now estab- 
lished and consolidated, is applied on all sides to the practi- 
cal conduct of life. "The grace of God" which "appeared" 
in Christ, " bringing salvation to all men," has developed a 
new moral discipline (-aiSeiWra, Tit. ii. 12). The religious 
principle of Paulinism, instead of being " sacrificed " to 
moral objects, realizes in them its living effect, the " fruits " 
by which its truth and worth are evidenced. Such passages 
as Romans xii. 1; 2 Corinthians vii. 1 ; 2 Thessalonians i. n, 



contain in germ all that is unfolded in the detailed ethical 
instruction of later epistles. 1 

" Righteousness,'' says Holtzmann (pp. 174, 175), appears 
in 1 Timothy vi. 11 ; 2 Timothy ii. 22 ; "as a virtue to be 
sought after," instead of being, in the specially Pauline 
sense, " a peculiar relation to God." But this is equally 
the case in Romans vi. 18, 20; 2 Corinthians ix. 10; on 
the other hand, gratuitous justification is unequivocally as- 
serted in the Pastoral epistles (Tit. iii. 7, etc.). The bond 
connecting the religious and moral is never broken by the 
apostle in his employment of this cardinal term of his theo- 
logy. The righteousness of imputation he always conceived 
as the basis of a new actual righteousness of life and be- 
haviour (see Sabatier, p. 300). Holtzmann repeats this 
objection, which he regards as of decisive weight, when he 
declares (p. 175) that "there is no room for justification in 
the Pauline meaning, where salvation is made to depend, 
as in 1 Timothy iv. 6, 16, vi. 14; Titus i. 9, on the careful 



1 The "separation of dogma and morality " alleged by M, Sabatier 
(pp. 271, 272), wq fail to recognise, 

^5 



3% THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

observance of traditional doctrine." In reply to this, it is 
enough to say that the stricture applies with equal force to 
such passages as 2 Thessalonians ii. 15 ; Romans vi. 17 ; 
or 1 Corinthians xv. 1, 2. In every case "doctrine" and 
" tradition " are the means of continued salvation, inasmuch 
as they supply the objective basis of a continued faith. 

(6) But it is after all in the religious rather than the 
ethical effect of salvation that the interest of the Pastoral 
epistles centres. The Christian "profession" is, in one 
word, "godliness" (1 Tim. ii. 9, 10; Beoo-eftda "reverence 
for God " — one of the unique expressions of the Pastorals), 
of which " good works " are the " fitting ornament." Chris- 
tianity is " the truth " or " the doctrine according to godli- 
ness." Fourteen times is the noun euo-e/^ei'a, or its congeners, 
employed in the three epistles, while it occurs not once 
(except in the negative in Romans) in any other writings of 
St. Paul. This remarkable fact is due to the cause that we 
noted at the outset. The apostle's teaching about God and 
about godliness come into like prominence. It was not so 
much the way of salvation, it was not so much the Person 
of Christ, nor even the moral practice of Christianity that 
was endangered by the pretended "knowledge" of the 
new Judaists, with their "fables" and "logomachies"; 
religion itself was at stake. The theories which separated 
God from nature and body from spirit were fatal to piety. 
They tended to dissolve the religious conception of life, to 
destroy godliness and virtue — " faith and a good conscience " 
— both at one stroke (see 1 Tim. iv. 1-5 ; vi. 3-5). 

With such dangers present to his mind, and likely to 
grow in force and seductiveness in the future,, the aged 
apostle bends all his efforts to guard and strengthen the 
spirit of religion. His exhortations to Timothy, and his 
injunctions to both his helpers touching their conduct of 
Church affairs, bear with concentrated urgency upon this 
one essential. The appeal, while it springs from the pro- 
found piety of St. Paul's own nature, is foreshadowed by 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 387 

such passages as Romans i. 18; v. 6, where sin is ''un- 
godliness " ' } so Colossians ii. 18, 23, condemning false and 
superstitious notions of worship ; and Ephesians iv. 24, 
which combines " righteousness and piety (coming) of the 
truth " as the leading dispositions of the " new man." Just 
as we found that Paul's doctrines of grace had enriched his 
views of the Divine nature, so they appear to have deepened 
and enlarged his conception of worship (1 Tim. ii. 1-8), and 
his sense of the part which reverence plays in sanctifying 
human life. 

To the same causes, increased perhaps in their effect 
by the writer's advanced age, we may refer the stress that 
is laid in these letters on " sobriety " and decorum of be- 
haviour. We note, too, in this connexion the admiration 
expressed for a "quiet and gentle life" (1 Tim. ii. 2). These 
preferences are by no means new features in St. Paul's 
character (see 1 Thess. iv. 11, 12 ; 1 Cor, xi. 2, 16; xiv. 33, 
40) ; but they receive new emphasis. 

In general, it is in " the other conditions, partly com- 
bined with and partly substituted for faith," that Holtzmann 
sees " the mediating and catholicizing character of these 
epistles, their smoothed and softened Paulinism, made most 
apparent " (p. 179). We should lose, in truth, some of the 
most precious lessons of the Pastorals if we did not observe 
this combination, if we failed to note the frequency of such 
expressions as faith and love, faith and truth, faith and a 
good conscience ; love, faith, and purity ; godliness, faith, 
love, etc. But the just induction from these varied com- 
binations is not that " faith " has lost its supremacy and is 
merged in " other conditions," but that these are its accom- 
paniments and the guarantees of its reality. On this point, 
1 Timothy i. 5 is instructive : " faith unfeigned " is made 
the ultimate source of the " love " which is " the end of the 
charge " — that is to say, the goal of all practical Christian 
teaching. This is nothing else than the "faith working 
through love" of Galatians v. 6, in ampler phrase. In other 



3? 8 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

places " faith " stands alone, as the basis of Christian ex- 
perience and life (i Tim. i. 2 ; iii. 1352 Tim. iii. 15 ; iv. 
7). Weiss and Ellicott rightly refuse to recognise in these 
epistles the ecclesiastical notion of the fides quam credimus^ 
the substitution of the content or object of faith for its 
subjective exercise. 2 Thessalonians ii. 12, 13 presents the 
same antithesis of " faith " and " truth " as subjective and 
objective counterparts, that we find in 1 Timothy ii. 7 ; iv. 
3, 6. It is singular that faith is spoken of oftener, propor- 
tionately, in these than in any other of the epistles, except 
Galatians. Grace and Faith form the double seal by which 
the apostle stamps these writings as his own. No one could 
imitate his accent, or reproduce by artifice the vivid and 
delicate sensibility with which these master words of Paul's 
gospel are employed in the letters to Timothy and Titus. 

(7) Once more let us listen to Dr. Holtzmann. " Prac- 
tical piety," he says, "and correct doctrine form the two 
poles, equally dominant," of the Pastoral epistles (p. 183). 
The latter of these two dominant notes he connects with 
"the growing churchliness " of the second century, under 
whose influence Christianity comes to be called " doctrine " 
(Tit. ii. 10), and Christ assumes mainly the role of Teacher. 
The preaching of the Gospel takes a conventional form ; and 
in its conflict with heretical theories the truth as it is in 
Jesus stiffens into a system of authoritative dogma. If 
orthodoxy is not yet known by name, the idea of it is there ; 
and the 6p6oToixfiv of 2 Timothy ii. 15 comes next door to 
the word itself. 

This contention, in substance, we admit. The question 
is, whether such a phenomenon was possible in the later 
apostolic age. To us it seems inevitable. The conserva- 
tism of "such an one as Paul the aged," if he lived until 
the middle of the seventh Christian decade, was sure to 
take this shape. Looking back on the pathway which his 
thought has trodden led by the Spirit of God, and on the 
completed teaching of his life, he puts his final seal upon it, 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 389 



in face of the denials and perversions to which it was already, 
and would be increasingly and on many sides exposed. Such 
a certification seems even necessary to the ideal complete- 
ness of St. Paul's theological work. From the first he has 
sought to give to his teaching a well-defined form ; and from 
the first he has claimed for it unqualified authority. The 
"type of doctrine" into which the Roman believers had 
" been delivered,'' and which they had " obeyed from the 
heart" (Rom. vi. 17), was a definite and settled creed, like 
the " form of sound words," the " sound doctrine," the 
" faithful word according to the teaching," on which this 
writer expatiates; and it becomes "sound doctrine" be- 
cause, and so soon as, in other quarters corruption and 
disease have taken hold of it. These expressions of the 
Pastorals only gather up and reaffirm the assertions made 
in regard to particular doctrines in St. Paul's previous con- 
troversial epistles. The " anathema " of Galatians i. 7-9 
is a vehement affirmation of the dogmatic principle (comp. 
Rom. xvi. 17 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 37 ; xv. 1-11 ; Eph. iv. 14 ; Col. 
i. 6, 7 ; Phil. iii. 15, 16; 2 Thess. ii. 15). 

Now that his teaching has become the recognised creed 
of a great community, it is natural that Paul should speak 
of himself as "apostle according to the faith of God's elect " 
(Tit. i. 1). Himself "ready to be offered up," with his 
battle fought and his course run, the apostle's chief remain- 
ing care is that he may see the great " deposit" committed 
into faithful and worthy hands. He desires to leave behind 
him in the Churches he has founded a community so well 
ordered and equipped, so rooted and built up in Christ and 
possessed by His Spirit, that it shall be for all time to come 
a "pillar and ground of the truth." In the epistle to the 
EphesianSj as Holtzmann points out (p. 187), the step had 
been completed by which Paulinism passed from the idea 
of the local to that of the oecumenical Church. To the 
Christian society thus fully constituted, is committed the 
"mystery of godliness" now fully revealed, There rises 



393 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



before the mind of the dying apostle the image of a uni- 
versal Church, to which is entrusted for the salvation of all 
men the charge of that Gospel long ago imparted to him- 
self by Christ Jesus his Lord. .Such is the situation which 
the last group of the Pauline epistles exhibit. Does it not 
bear the marks of historical and psychological reality ? 

Thus we pass from the thought of the "great house," 
unfolded in the Ephesian letter, to that of the " vessels " of 
its service, their qualities and uses, and the solemn respon- 
sibilities which accrue to them. Their worth lies in the 
greatness of the Church they serve ; and hers in the great- 
ness of the truth she holds in trust for mankind. 



V. The Church System of the Pastorals. 

We are now, therefore, as we hope, in a position to 
appreciate the peculiar features of the Church order and 
organization set before us in the Pastoral epistles, and so 
to complete the task proposed in this inquiry. 

To promote " godliness " and " sound doctrine " is the 
leading object of these letters. This purpose dictates the 
qualifications laid down in i Timothy iii. and Titus i. for 
ministerial office ; and it accounts for the fact that these 
conditions are so nearly alike for bishops (or presbyters) 
and for deacons : 

" The bishop must be without reproach, husband of one wife, sober, 
sensible, orderly, hospitable, apt to teach, . . . gentle, peaceable, 
ree from the love of money . . . Deacons in like manner must be 
grave . . . not double-tongued, not given to wine, nor seeking 
base gain, holding the mystery of faith in a pure conscience." 

These instructions, on the face of them, are not intended 
as an exhaustive description of what the bishop and deacon 
should be. They scarcely look beyond the moral qualities 
of an ordinary, reputable Christian man. But it is just 
here, in their commonplace and unambitious character, that 
the point of the specifications lies. To the need of other, 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 391 

more shining gifts the Churches were sufficiently alive. 
What the apostle insists upon is that solid, moral qualities 
shall not be overlooked, nor taken for granted in any case 
without strict inquiry. The danger was lest talent and 
cleverness should carry the day, and the leadership of the 
Church fall into the hands of men deficient in the elements 
of a worthy Christian character. The enemy had sown his 
tares among the wheat of Christ's field. The discrepancy 
between the actual and ideal Church was already painfully 
manifest (2 Tim. ii. 19-21). Self-seeking teachers had in- 
sinuated themselves into the Christian societies, who knew 
how to impose on the credulous or unstable by their show 
of learning and asceticism (1 Tim. i. 6, 7 ; iv. 1-3 ; vi. 3-10). 
Entrance into the ministry must be barred to such candi- 
, dates as these ; and officers must be chosen whose character 
commanded the respect of the community, and who would 
be likely to exert a wholesome and steadying influence on 
the Church's life, at a time of transition and feverish unrest, 
Kiihl very aptly says : 

"The prescriptions of these epistles bear throughout an eminently 
practical stamp, and rind their characteristic expression in the exhorta- 
tion to Timothy : Be //ion a pattern of the believers. The false intel- 
lectualism of the errorists is traced to their want of practical piety ; and 
this tvcre^eia, this open sense for the divine, has in turn its practical 
moral guarantee in a Christianly moral life. Such piety it is the aim 
of these writings, in their whole tenor, to quicken and renew." 

If godliness was the chief desideratum for the Church at 
large, so much the more was it essential to the official 
ministry. This anxiety on the apostle's part is in profound 
accord with the sentiments that he always cherished con- 
cerning his own position as a minister of Christ. 

" Our glorying is this, the testimony of our conscience that in holi- 
ness and sincerity of God we have had our conversation in the world. 
In all things commending ourselves as ministers of God : in 
pureness, in knowledge, in long-suffering, in kindness, in the Holy 
Spirit, in love unfeigned, — by the armour of righteousness on the right 
hand and on the left " (2 Cor. i, 12 \ vi. 4-7), 



392 



THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



So he wrote years ago to the captious Corinthians ; and 
such a testimony, both from within and from without, he 
desires for his successors. 

Along with the primary responsibility for character in the 
pastors of the Church, there devolves the charge of doctrine 
■ — not indeed committed solely, but specially and by way of 
guardianship, to the separated ministry. " Faithful men " 
they must be, able to " teach others," to whom above others 
the things "heard," says the apostle, "from me amongst 
many witnesses" are to be "committed" (2 Tim. ii. 2). 
There is then an apostolical succession ; but it descends to 
the humblest preacher, duly qualified and appointed in a 
loyal Christian community. The chain of the succession 
lies in the believing transmission of the doctrine. 

Besides provision for public teaching (Gal. vi. 6 ; Rom. 
xii. 7), there were administrative and disciplinary offices to 
be performed in the Christian societies. And it was for 
these purposes that local ministers were first required. The 
relation and adjustment of these several functions to each 
other in the early Church is a question of extreme difficulty. 
There are two distinctions which must be carefully borne 
in mind — distinctions complicated with each other in 
various ways : (1) That existing between the official and 
what we may call the charismatic ministry ; i.e., between 
the ministry of persons formally appointed to Church 
office, and that exercised in virtue of some extraordinary 
Divine endowment in the man, but not such as of itself 
qualified him to bear rule in the Church ; or, in other 
words, between the ministry of official status and that of 
personal gift, the former in some measure implying the 
latter, but the latter not of necessity carrying with it the 
former (see 1 Cor. xii. 4-1 1 ; Rom. xii. 3-8). (2) Another 
distinction, of the greatest practical moment, is that which 
separated the local and congregational from the itinerant or 
missio?iary ministry. To the former of these classes " the 
bishops and deacons " of Philippians and of the Pastorals 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 



belonged ; to the latter the " apostles " and " evangelists " ; 
while " prophets " and " teachers " might labour in a single 
community (Acts xiii. i), or might, and in post-apostolic 
times commonly did, extend their work over a wide area (see 
the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd of Hernias). 
In the earliest times, public teaching in the Christian 
assemblies was free. Each member of the Church might 
speak, provided it were " in order " and " to edification " 
(see i Cor. xiv.). We must presume, however, that even 
at Corinth there were " presidents " of some sort to deter- 
mine, in harmony with the sense of the assembly, what was 
in order and to edification (comp. i Thess. v. 12 ; Rom. 
xii. 8, and the "presiding elders" of 1 Tim. v. 17). Only 
the " women must keep silence in the assemblies " (1 Cor. 
xiv. 34, 35). When, now, it is said in 1 Timothy ii. 12, 
" A woman I do not permit to teach," we presume that 
the right of teaching was still reserved for all other com- 
petent Church members (comp. ver. 8, "I wish the men 
to pray in every place," obviously relating to the exercise 
of public prayer). But this license in no long time had 
come to be abused. Talkative and pretentious men found 
their advantage in it. The Church meetings were made a 
theatre of " discussions and logomachies, out of which envy 
and strife arose," tending to " questionings " rather than to 
promote "the dispensation of God which is in faith" (1 
Tim. i. 4 ; vi. 3-5). While the writer does not for this 
reason forbid the established liberty of preaching and pro- 
phesying, 1 he is anxious that the bishops should be efficient 

1 The teaching office of the bishop is most emphasized in the epistle 
to Titus. He was organizing new Churches in Crete, where no pre- 
established license of teaching existed, to stand in the way of the full 
authority of the presbyter-bishops. We observe, moreover, that there 
is no mention of deacons here, who might not be required in small 
Churches, at least in the first stage of Church organization (comp. Acts 
xiv. 23). Nor is it prescribed that the bishop shall not be a " neophyte," 
as in the older Church of Ephesus (1 Tim. iii. 6) ; but he must have 
"believing children" — a condition necessary to mention in a new 
community, but that takes a different and stricter form in the directions 
addressed to Timothy at Ephesus (1 Tim. iii. 4, 5), 



394 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

in this respect, competent to take a leading part in public 
instruction and to counteract the attempts of false and 
foolish teachers. The words of i Timothy v. 1 7 make it 
tolerably clear that while teaching was not, like ruling, an 
exclusive nor indispensable attribute of the official elders, 
still they frequently exercised this function, and the writer 
wishes to encourage them in doing so. 

There is little evidence to be gleaned from other sources 
as to the connexion between ruling and teaching in the 
local ministry in apostolic times. Hebrews xiii. 7 indicates 
that, amongst Jewish Christians at least in the seventh 
decade, the two offices were commonly regarded as one. 
James iii. 1 belongs to an earlier time, when things were 
tending in that direction. In the Gentile communities the 
liberty of teaching continued to a much later epoch ; 
indeed, the tradition of it remains in the Apostolic Constitu- 
tions (viii. 32), which in their present form are referred to 
the third or fourth century. In Ephesians iv. 11, however, 
" the pastors and teachers " form a single group, if not 
identical yet closely allied, and alike distinguished from the 
several orders of "apostles," "prophets," and "evangelists." 
It is just this tendency to unite the pastoral and teaching 
offices to which the Pastoral epistles give expression. 

When we turn to the newly discovered Teaching of the 
Apostles, our most important witness for the development 
of Church organization in the post-apostolic period, we find 
that now " the bishops and deacons themselves discharge 
the ministry of prophets and teachers " (chap, xv.), while 
at the same time there are itinerant " prophets " and 
" teachers," who possess a preponderant influence, and may 
even supersede the local officers in the conduct of the 
Eucharist (chaps, x.-xiii.). The Shepherd of Hermas — dating 
from the early part of the second century, as the Teaching 
probably from the close of the first — gives evidence to the 
same effect. Now, it is noticeable that our epistles make 
no reference to these roving prophets and teachers, whose 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 395 

ascendency is the most conspicuous feature in the picture 
of Church life afforded by the Teaching. Their prominence 
belongs to the transitional period between the personal rule 
of the apostles and the official rule of the mon-episcopal 
hierarchy established in the second century. Instead of 
the Teaching of the Apostles forming, as Harnack says, " a 
mean term between 1 Corinthians xii. and the Pastorals," the 
truth is that the Pastorals and Ephesians together are the 
mean term between 1 Corinthians xii., with its fluid and un- 
formed Church life, and the settled and formal order which 
the Teaching delineates. 

Since Bishop Lightfoot's famous Dissertation on the 
Christian Ministry, the identity of " bishop : ' and " elder " 
in the New Testament may be regarded as an established 
fact. 1 The presiding congregational officers are elders in 
respect of rank and "honour" (1 Tim. v. 17), and bishops 
in respect of their " work " and responsibility (1 Tim. hi. 1 ; 
Tit. i. 7 ; Acts xx. 28). The late Dr. Hatch (whose removal 
by death we deeply deplore, in common with all Christian 
scholars) attempted in his Bampton Lectures to show that 
the two offices were of distinct and independent origin. 
He argued that the presbyterate was a Jeivish, and purely 
magisterial and disciplinary order ; while the episcopate was 
Greek in its derivation, financial and administrative in the 
first instance, but taking on in the Church a spiritual and 
charismatic character. This theory, we are persuaded, will 
not be sustained on mature examination. 2 According to 



1 Some able scholars maintain that elder is the wider term, denoting 
Church office generally, and embracing bishop and deacon alike ; so 
Dr. Milligan in the Expositor, 3rd series, vi., 348 ff. This position 
cannot, we think, be sustained in face of Titus i. 5, 7, so precisely 
identifying >( elders'"' and "the bishop"; nor does it accord with 
I Timothy iv. 14, v. 17, — texts which imply a presidential dignity, 
inappropriate to the name and calling of the " deacons." The deacons 
would more naturally come in the first instance from the ranks of the 
yaung men. " Young men " is a quasi-official term in Acts v. 6, 10. 

2 Kiihl subjects Dr. Hatch's theory of the episcopate to a searching 
criticism, in pp. 87 ff. of his Gemeindeordnung ; and Gore's recent 



396 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

Hatch's hypothesis, it was only gradually, towards the end 
of the first century, that the two systems were amalgamated 
and presbyter and bishop shared the same functions, until 
the bishop was differentiated from the presbytery in a new 
way under the mon-episcopal regime of Ignatius. If Dr. 
Hatch is right, then the Pastoral and Ephesian epistles, the 
Acts of the Apostles, and the epistle of James, and i Peter 
must all be relegated, at the earliest, to the closing years of 
the first century. So Harnack 1 inferred with irresistible 
logic from Hatch's premises ; and while Dr. Hatch did not 
draw these conclusions in the Bampton Lectures, his 
articles on Paul and Pastoral Epistles in the Encyclopedia 
Britannica (9th ed.) show that he had reached the same 
result in the case of Ephesians and the Pastorals, and 
inclined to it in regard to the Acts. This is a heavy price 
to pay for Dr. Hatch's attractive theory. So far as any 
case has been made out for St. Paul's authorship of these 
letters, it negatives the supposition that the presbyterate 
and episcopate were fundamentally different offices. 

Very significant for the primitive meaning of episcopits is 
1 Peter ii. 25, where Christ Himself is called "the shep- 
herd and bishop of your souls "; and with the "bishop" of 
this passage the "presbyters" of chap. v. 1-4 are linked 
as those who " shepherd the flock " under the " Chief 
Shepherd," just as in Acts xx. 17-28 "the elders of the 
Church " at Ephesus are exhorted to " take heed to the flock 
over which the Holy Spirit made them overseers (bishops) " ; 






and important work on The Ministry of the Christian Churchy while 
less successful in its constructive argument, makes some effective criti- 
cisms on the HcLtch-HarnacJi hypothesis. See also the discussion on 
the Origin of the Christian Ministry in the Expositor, 3rd series, vols, 
v., vi. ; especially the contributions of Drs. Sanday and Salmon. 

1 In his notes to the German translation of Hatch's Lectures 
{Die Gesellschaftsverfassung, etc.), and Analecten zu Hatch. In the 
Expositor, 3rd series, vol. v. pp. 334, 335, Harnack says, " I regard 
the Pastoral Epistles as writings which, in their present form, were 
composed in the middle of the second century ; but older documents 
were made use of in their composition." 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 397 

similarly, " shepherds " is the designation for Church rulers 
in Ephesians iv. n. .The same conception of the bishop's 
work underlies the directions of the Pastorals ; it comes 
out vividly in the question of 1 Timothy iii. 5 : "If he 
knows not how to preside over his own house, how will he 
care for the Church of God ? " (comp. John x. 13) — a higher 
care, surely, than that of the Church's money chest ! These 
documents bear a common witness to the moral and spiritual 
character of the episcopal calling, and through it a mutual 
testimony to each other. They unite to express with 
fine simplicity, and without a trace of second century 
ecclesiasticism, the apostolical conception of the Christian 
ministry — viz., that of spiritual sliepherding. 

Still the question remains : If presbyter and bishop 
meant the same thing, why the two names ? For answer, 
we are left to conjecture. .We venture to think that the 
title bishop, first appearing in the speech and from the pen 
of St. Paul, is due to the apostle himself, original as he 
was in so many things. Elder preoccupied the field in a 
community of Jewish origin, and came into use as a matter 
of course, so soon as a board of managers was needed in the 
new society (Acts xi. 30; xiv. 23, etc.). But this designa- 
tion had certain obvious defects. It was ambiguous (see 
1 Tim. v. r, 17 ; 1 Pet. v. 1, 5), and unexpressive. It was, 
moreover, in constant use among the Jews as a title of civil 
office — a circumstance liable to cause confusion, and per- 
haps distaste to Gentile Christians. The Old Testament 
suggested episcopus l to those casting about for a substitute ; 
and this term commended itself by the fact that it indicated 
the peculiar nature of the office (overseership), and was 
kindred in meaning to sliepherd, a figure hallowed and 
endeared by the lips of Christ (John x. ; comp. 1 Pet. ii. 25). 

1 See Cremer's Biblico-theological Lexicon, s.v. 'Eir la kotos ; and 
Lightfoot's Note in his Commentary on Philippians, pp. 93 ff., also his 
Dissertation on the Christian Ministry in the same vol., which still 
remains the best elucidation of the subject. 



39^ THE APOSTLE PAUL. 



If about the same time, in the older Pauline Churches, 
assistant officers came to be needed in the shape of deacons, 
after the model of Jerusalem (Acts vi.), it would be still 
more necessary to give the superior functionaries a name 
implying superintendence. We find, in fact, that " bishop " 
and " deacon " are correlative. It is possible that St. Paul's 
address at Miletus, reported in Acts xx., marks the juncture 
at which the new appellation was making its appearance, 
and that the remarkable words of ver. 28 were expressly 
chosen in order to recommend its use ; when he writes to 
the Philippians a few years later (chap. i. 1), it is an accepted 
and familiar title. The "helps" and "governments" of 
1 Corinthians xii. 28 contain in the abstract the antithesis 
of " deacon " and " bishop," present at this earlier time 
in the apostle's mind, although it had not yet at Corinth 
crystallized into formal expression. But whatever be the 
true explanation of the double name, it is surely past ques- 
tion that in the Acts and epistles elder and bishop are 
synonymous. 

The long section devoted to Church widows, in 1 Timothy 
v. 3-16, is interesting on many grounds. It speaks for an 
early date for the epistle, that the claims of dependent 
widows had not hitherto been fully discussed and settled. 
The sixth chapter of the Acts, accepted on all hands as a 
genuine picture of primitive Church life, shows that the 
matter from the first received much attention. Our author 
is anxious, too, that the influence of the "aged women" 
generally should be utilized in the guidance of their sex 
(Tit. ii. 3-5). It is not the first time that St. Paul has shown 
his sense of the importance attaching to the position of 
women in Christian society (1 Cor. xi. 2-16); and the 
attempts of heretical teachers to win their adherence (2 Tim. 
iii. 6) made it the more necessary that the Church should 
be guarded upon this side. Holtzmann curiously argues 
(pp. 245, 246) that the recommendation of 1 Timothy v. 14, 
approving the re-marriage of " younger widows," came from 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 399 

the experience of " a later generation "' ; and he is surprised 
at the appearance, within the lifetime of the apostle Paul, of 
" widows grown grey in the service of the Church " ! Grant 
ten years' existence to the Ephesian Church, and a moderate 
knowledge of human life to the apostle, and these critical 
difficulties are solved. In the young Cretan Churches the 
question of the widows has not yet arisen. 

There is, no doubt, a difference between the Paul of i 
Corinthians vii. and of i Timothy in the tenor of their 
observations on marriage and "child-bearing." But the 
advices of the former passage were based on prudential 
and temporary considerations (vers. 28, 29). Now that the 
Church appears likely to continue on earth for a longer 
space, family life resumes its natural importance ; and the 
epistles of the third group (Colossians and Ephesians) give 
to it the highest ethical and religious value. 

It remains finally, and in distinction from the local 
officership of the Churches, to consider the ecclesiastical 
status of Timothy and Titus. Since the failure of Baur's 
attempt to identify the bishop of the Pastorals with the mon- 
episcopus 1 (or monarchical bishop) of the second century, 
his successors have turned the functions of Timothy and 
Titus to account in favour of the Tendency theory. They 
seek to show that the position of these apostolic commis- 
sioners is magnified in the interests of episcopal autocracy. 

If so, the supposed episcopalian forger has shown himself 
both timid and blundering in the extreme ; and the partisans 
of the Ignatian episcopate can have had little to thank him 
for. The epistles of Ignatius, unquestionably, make use of 
the Pastorals, but in no instance, so far as we can find, in the 
sense imputed to the latter by the Tubingen school. The 
"tendency" of the epistles to Timothy and Titus had not 
then been discovered ! The only title the writer ventures to 



1 We owe this convenient term to Mr. Gore's Ministry of the Chris- 
tian Church. 



400 T&E A POS TLE PA UL . 



give to either of the delegates is that of " evangelist." They 
stand in no fixed relationship to the local Churches. The 
powers they exercise for the time in Ephesus or Crete, 
as formerly in Corinth or Thessalonica, are the powers of 
the living apostle exercised through them; and are of an 
expressly occasional and limited character. They are to 
choose and ordain Church officers in the apostle's absence, 
subject to the approval of the voice of the Church (im- 
plied throughout i Tim. iii. 1-13); and, in Timothy's case, 
to investigate complaints that might be made against 
" elders " already in office (1 Tim. v. 19-25 ; also Tit. i. 6-9). 
And this is all ! There is nothing to show that they charged 
themselves with details of local administration, or with the 
discipline of lay members of the flock. Paul had himself 
excommunicated certain persons (1 Tim. i. 20); Timothy 
and Titus are bidden merely to "avoid" the mischief-makers. 
In this unique commission there is more that differs from 
than resembles the functions of the latter monarchical 
bishop. Holtzmann says, indeed, that Timothy and Titus, 
with their powers of visitation, were prototypes of the arch- 
episcopate (p. 266). But who ever thought of archbishops 
in the second century ? 

After all, their relations with the Ephesian or Cretan 
presbyteries constituted only the incidental part of the life- 
work of these apostolic men. " The testimony of our 
Lord " was laid upon Timothy, through God's gift of grace 
solemnly attested and committed to him at the outset of his 
career (2 Tim. i. 6-14) ; and this it was his business every- 
where to proclaim. It is his to "do the work of an evange- 
list," and to share with his master in the glorious toils and 
sufferings of a missionary preacher (2 Tim. i. 8 ; ii. 1-13). 
This mission required, beyond the repetition of the Gospel 
story and the announcement of God's message of peace to 
mankind (1 Tim. ii. 3-7), that the purpose of grace should 
be carried out to its practical issues in the moral life ot 
believers—" the things which become the sound doctrine. 



THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. 401 






It is not a testimony only, but a charge that is entrusted to 
"my child Timothy," that he may "war the good warfare, 
holding faith and a good conscience" (1 Tim. i. 3-11, i8 ; 
19; Tit. ii. 11, 12). This testimony and charge are of uni- 
versal import ; they belong to the ministry of Christ's servants 
and soldiers wherever exercised. And, in fact, the apostle 
dwells with greatest emphasis on Timothy's personal voca- 
tion in the second letter, when his commission at Ephesus 
is about to terminate, and he is in the act of summoning 
him to join himself at Rome. 

It is no question, therefore, 01 ecclesiastical system or 
episcopal claims that weighs on the mind of the writer of 
these memorable letters. His supreme concern is for the 
maintenance of character and true doctrine in the Christian 
ministry, and through it, in the Church it serves. All that 
was local and of the occasion in the charge of the departing 
apostle to his children merges itself in that which belonged 
to their essential calling, as bearers of the message of the 
glory of the blessed God. The same call, conveyed through 
diversities of operation, is given to every true minister of 
Christ. Whatever human hands may take part in its 
bestowal, it is God's charis/n, His immediate and sovereign 
gift of grace. It is manifest, now as then, in the spirit of 
power and love and discipline. To all who bear it the great 
herald and apostle cries : Preach the word. Guard the 
good deposit. Suffer hardship with we, as a good soldier oj 
Christ Jesus. 

Paul's living utterance makes itself heard in these severe 
and lofty tones, not that of some actor on the ecclesiastical 
stage who has assumed his mask, some impostor hidden 
under the dead lion's skin. Words, thoughts, spirit in these 
letters alike speak for their great author — great in his latest 
work, wise and far-seeing in his care for the flock of Christ, 
skilful to fence its fold against the approaching wolves, as 
he had been mighty in word and doctrine in those wondrous 

26 






402 THE APOSTLE PAUL. 

years when he founded Gentile Christendom and built up 
the imperishable fabric of the New Testament theology. 
The second century never spoke as these epistles speak. 
By their voice we discover the apostle still alive, when all 
other clear record of him has perished amid the confusion 
of the latter years of Nero's rule. He has lived, happily, 
to send to the Church out of that time of fear and dark- 
ness a last watchword, — his message of farewell to the 
men he trusted most, and to us all through them. It is 
a word full of hope, and full of solemn warning, — a message 
of discipline, of courage, and of unchanging faith in Christ 

niSTos o aotos. 



Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome, and London. 



